BUTLER, Thomas (1634-80)

BUTLER, Thomas (1634–80)

styled 1634-42 Visct. Thurles; styled 1642-80 earl of Ossory [I]; cr. 14 Sept. 1666 (by writ) Bar. BUTLER OF MOORE PARK

First sat 18 Sept. 1666; last sat 1 July 1680

MP Dublin University [I], 1661-2; Bristol 16 May 1661-14 Sept. 1666

b. 8 July 1634, 2nd but 1st surv. s. of James Butler, duke of Ormond, and Elizabeth (1615-84), suo jure Baroness Dingwall [S], da. of Richard Preston, earl of Desmond [I] and Lord Dingwall [S]; bro. of Richard Butler, Baron Butler of Weston, earl of Arran [I]. educ. privately, tutor Thomas Page;1 travelled abroad (France and Holland, 1648-52, 1657-60); Académie del Campo, Paris 1649-50;2 DCL Oxf. 4 Feb. 1667.3 m. 7/17 Nov. 1659, (with £10,000), Amilia, (d.1688), da. of Lodewyck (Ludwig) van Nassau, Bar. of Leck and Beverwaert, 6s. (4 d.v.p.), 6da. (3 d.v.p.).4 KG 30 Sept. 1672. d. 30 July 1680.

Jt. farmer of wine and brandy licences [I], Aug. 1660-?65;5 PC [I], Dec. 1660-d.;6 mbr., council of Munster, 1660;7 lord deputy [I], 1664-5, 1668-9; gent. of bedchamber 1666-d.;8 PC 1666-79,9 Apr. 1680-d.;10commr. of trade 1668-72; mbr. committee of Privy Council for trade and plantations, 1675-79; commr. of admiralty 26 Sept. 1677-14 May 1679; ld. chamberlain to Queen Catherine of Braganza Nov. 1676-d.11

Envoy extraordinary to France Nov.-Dec. 1672; special ambassador to Low Countries, Nov. 1674-Jan. 1675.

Col. of ft. July-Oct. 1660, 1661;12 col. and capt. of ft. [I], Dec. 1660;13 col. and capt. tp. horse [I], Dec. 1661-d.;14 col. of ft. (Dutch army) 1678-d.;15 lt. gen. of horse [I], 1661-74;16 lt. gen. [I], 1665-d.;17 lt. gen. (Dutch service) Jan.-Aug. 1678; gov. Tangier July 1680-d.; capt. RN 1666 (marines); rear-adm. of the blue 18 Apr. 1673; rear-adm. of the red 14 Aug. 1673-74; adm. of the fleet Sept. 1673.

Freeman, Bristol 1661,18 Dublin 1670,19 Portsmouth 1675;20 commr. assessment, Bristol 1661-3;21; elder bro. Trinity House 1673, master 1675-6.22

MP [I], 1661-2.

Associated with: Moor Park, Herts.

Likenesses: oil on canvas, studio of Sir P. Lely, c. 1678, NPG 371.

The young courtier

Ossory was a man of great public reputation to contemporaries. To Anthony Hamilton, Count Grammont, a relative through his mother, he was a man ‘of the most liberal sentiments, and of great probity.’23 To Burnet, he was ‘a man of great honour, generosity, and courage.’24 As early as 1656, Richard Talbot, the future earl of Tyrconnel [I], had described Ossory as ‘a complete courtier and most understanding man.’25 Liberality may have been a major flaw in his character, for as early as 1659 it was remarked ‘that I know [not] whether it be fate or misfortune or generosity or a false persuasion prompting his honour to certain expenses which no gentleman besides himself holds himself obliged to.’26 Such an attitude unsurprisingly led to chronic indebtedness.

During his exile in Holland, Ossory met Lord Beverwaert, governor of Sluys, and went on to marry one of his daughters, despite his mother’s reservations.27 One of the attractions of his marriage into the Dutch aristocracy was the attendant settlement which apparently provided him with £2,000 p.a. and made provision to pay his debts.28 Ossory’s links with the Dutch proved to be one of the most important elements of his public career. Following the Restoration, Ossory’s wife was naturalized by an act of Parliament that received the royal assent on 13 Sept. 1660. Friendship with James Stuart, duke of York, was another important feature of his career. Ossory was a witness to the secret marriage of the duke on 3 Sept. 1660 to Anne Hyde. By virtue of his presence at the ceremony, Ossory made an affidavit to that effect on 18 Feb. 1661 before the Privy Council.29 His connection to the court enabled him to gain a series of grants from the Crown.30

At the 1661 general election Ossory was returned for Bristol, being allowed to take his seat even though it was the subject of a double return. Later in April, the coronation caused a dispute between Ossory and Jocelyn Percy, styled Lord Percy, the future 5th earl of Northumberland. Percy was able to rebut Ossory’s claim to precedence, because he was the eldest son of an English earl of an earlier creation than Ormond and because Ossory’s counter-claim as the eldest son of an Irish duke was deemed not relevant to the case.31 Charles II informed Ormond in June 1662 that Ossory was to be called to the Irish upper House where he took his seat on 8 Aug. 1662.32 Ossory was a significant Irish figure in his own right, possessing over 5,000 acres in about 1675 and as such, an obvious choice as lord deputy when Ormond visited England in May 1664.33 He seems to have taken his duties seriously, being described as ‘vigilant, careful, and very wary’. It was during his time in charge of the Irish administration that Ossory revealed something of his views on the state’s role in religious life. In a letter of 30 July 1664, forwarding to London the Irish bill for bringing up the children of deceased Catholic parents in the protestant religion, he referred to his dislike of the bill, accounting it ‘a force’ to take children out of the hands of their nearest relatives, and to breed them up in another faith, and that it was a harsh, if not an unwarrantable, way of propagating religion, which would be counter-productive as religious opinions were only strengthened by persecution.34

When Ormond landed back in Ireland on 3 Sept. 1665, Ossory was relieved of his official governmental duties.35 In January 1666, Henry Bennet, Baron Arlington, was keen for Ossory to return to England to help in the negotiations concerning his marriage to the sister of the countess of Ossory.36 By 3 Mar. Ossory had arrived at Moor Park, the Butlers’ new residence in Hertfordshire.37 With the negotiations complete, Ossory witnessed Arlington’s marriage there on 17 April.38 Thereafter Ossory and Arlington were to be close political allies. It was not only Arlington who offered Ossory a warm welcome in England. On 20 Feb. 1666, Michael Boyle, the archbishop of Dublin, wrote to Gilbert Sheldon, archbishop of Canterbury, asking that when Ossory waited upon him, he should be received favourably as ‘a perfect friend and patron he was to this poor Church during his government here; he supported us against all oppositions, and some times interposed his power where persons would not be silenced by reason.’ 39

Meanwhile, Arlington’s ability as a political operator was put to work in facilitating the transfer of Ormond’s place in the bedchamber to Ossory.40 Through Arlington’s ‘contrivances’, Ormond resigned his bedchamber place ‘to make room for his majesty’s favour to’ Ossory. In so doing, Ormond made plain his motives: the bedchamber was ‘a more steady station than a ship’, a reference to Ossory’s preference for service in the fleet.41 On 24 May 1666 a warrant was issued to pay Ossory £1,000 p.a. as a gentleman of the bedchamber, ‘notwithstanding the general stay of pensions’.42 Both the duke and duchess of Ormond were consistent in their opposition to Ossory going to serve in the fleet, but Ossory was a match for them in his determination to fight. According to Arlington’s later account, Ossory, his wife and the Arlingtons were on the way into Suffolk, when news of the Dutch fleet’s activity reached them, whereupon Ossory and Sir Thomas Clifford, the future Baron Clifford, made a dash for Harwich and joined the fleet. The ensuing ‘Four Days’ Fight’ saw Ossory win ‘so much honour and advantage to his reputation’, that Arlington felt the duke would approve of his actions, especially as Ossory was willing to promise that he would not volunteer again.43 His letter crossed with one from Ormond that made clear his displeasure at his son ‘breaking loose’ and attempting to reach the fleet, and his conviction that Arlington was not governing his son as he expected.44 Among contemporaries Ormond’s reaction was untypical. On 2 July 1666, Sir John Birkenhead‡ described Ossory as the ‘most beloved and honoured of Lords, great or small. ... Whenever he pleases to try the strength of the people’s affection to him... you will know what ground he has got upon the whole body of the gentry and subjects here.’45 Nevertheless, despite the widespread acclaim his actions had engendered, a frustrated Ossory was forced to bow to the wishes of his parents and sit out the battle of St James’s Day on 25 July 1666 from the safety of Tunbridge Wells, from whence he could hear the battle in progress.46

On 14 Sept. 1666, a warrant was sent to the lord chancellor, Edward Hyde, earl of Clarendon, to issue a writ for Ossory to attend Parliament as a baron of England, being the son and heir apparent of Ormond.47 The intention seems to have been to call him up in his father’s barony of Lanthony, but in effect it created a new title of Butler of Moore Park.48 This together with the acceleration of his Irish earldom also created confusion after his death. On 14 Aug. 1680, Richard Mulys wrote ‘we are here at a loss not knowing whether my Lord’s title of earl of Ossory were by creation, and consequently we know not how to style our young Lord.’49 His elevation to the Lords also came at some financial cost to Ormond. As Arlington wrote on 16 Oct. 1666, Ossory acknowledged the receipt of £4,000 from his father in eight months, but argued that his expenses in setting up house had been extraordinary.50

In the Lords 1666-8

Ossory first sat on 18 Sept. 1666, the opening day of the 1666-7 session, being introduced by William Crofts, Baron Crofts, and Arlington. He attended on 79 days of the session, nearly 87 per cent of the total, and was named to four committees. One of Ossory’s roles in the Lords generally was as a spokesman for the Irish interest and in this session, specifically, as an opponent of the bill to prevent the importation of Irish cattle into England. On 29 Sept. Arthur Annesley, earl of Anglesey, wrote to Ormond that he had been in close consultations with Ossory concerning how best to oppose the bill.51 Indeed, such was Ossory’s commitment to the Irish cause that he ended up in serious trouble with the House. On 26 Oct., George Villiers, 2nd duke of Buckingham, reported to the Lords that Ossory had challenged him to a duel following the previous day’s debate in the committee of the whole on the bill, which he conceived to be a breach of privilege. Ossory had apparently taken exception to Buckingham’s characterization of the bill’s opponents as having either ‘an Irish interest or an Irish understanding, which is as much as to say he is a fool’.52 Ossory’s challenge was thwarted when, after waiting for three hours in Chelsea Fields, he was confronted, not by Buckingham, but by Louis de Duras, the future earl of Feversham, and a guard, sent by the king to detain him.53

On 29 Oct. 1666 the House took into consideration Buckingham’s complaint that Ossory had challenged him because of words said in the House. Ossory denied this, claiming other matters outside the House had occasioned the challenge. Buckingham then attempted to prove his account, which Ossory countered by attributing his actions to a quarrel of longer duration, occasioned, as Arlington reported, by ‘some sharp railleries, and unhandsome reflections the duke made upon his relations and called me for a witness, how often he had resented them, and resolved to fight him.’54 Arlington backed Ossory up, and even called upon York to corroborate his own fears that a quarrel was brewing. After a debate both Ossory and Buckingham were ordered to withdraw, and a further debate ensued as to the punishments to be inflicted on the two men. Ossory’s friends endeavoured to obtain an equal punishment, but failed. Ossory was committed to the Tower, after admonishment by the lord chancellor, whilst Buckingham was ordered into the custody of black rod. Arlington drew up a petition on Ossory’s behalf, which he showed to the lord chancellor, who advised that York be approached to present it. On 31 Oct. Ossory petitioned for his discharge, as did Buckingham, and both men were released and ordered to attend on George Monck, duke of Albemarle, and Edward Montagu, 2nd earl of Manchester, in order to be reconciled. Ormond’s response to Arlington’s account was to write on 5 Nov. 1666 that ‘the House of Lords hath proceeded with great justice and prudence such as I hope will prevent their being frequently diverted from more important affairs by interpositions of that nature.’55 Such incidents did not harm Ossory’s reputation, especially at court, where he was as an adept courtier. He was welcome at the apartments of the countess of Castlemaine, and hence in the king’s company. According to Edward Conway, 3rd viscount Conway, in October 1667 Ossory had agreed with him ‘to go halves there this winter’.56

Nevertheless, when proceedings on the Irish cattle bill resumed, Ossory again fell foul of the House. On 19 Nov. 1666, during the debate in committee on the bill, he attacked both Buckingham and Anthony Ashley Cooper, Baron Ashley, for which he was ordered to be admonished by the lord chancellor and forced to apologize. Ossory had accused Ashley of speaking like a member of the council of Oliver Cromwell‡, a telling debating point, but one for which Ashley was covered by the Act of Indemnity. Buckingham was merely told that something he had said was untrue.57 As Anglesey put it on 20 Nov. 1666 Ossory had shown ‘stern resentment’ of Ashley’s expressions reflecting on Ormond and the other promoters of the gift of Irish cattle to the distressed people of London.58 To Conway, writing on 27 Nov., these proceedings against Ossory were ‘unkind and absolutely unjust,’ because Ossory ‘did not transgress the written rules and standing orders of our House, but they would overrule those orders to make him criminal.’59 Not surprisingly, on 23 Nov. Ossory dissented when the Irish cattle bill passed the House.

On 29 Dec. 1666 Anglesey was able to inform Ormond that Buckingham’s latest quarrel, this time with Henry Pierrepont, marquess of Dorchester, had resulted in his imprisonment, which ‘makes my Lord of Ossory pass for the more peaceable man.’60 On 23 Jan. 1667 Ossory chaired the committee on the bill for settling the moiety of the manor of Iron Acton on Sir John Poyntz, reporting it on 25 January.61 This was a familial duty, Ormond’s mother being Poyntz’s aunt. Meanwhile, Ormond’s fear of an attack on Ireland saw him write in urgent terms to Arlington on 13 Jan. to ensure that Ossory ‘return at once to his charge here.’62 Such a summons had its effect; Ossory landed in Ireland on 9 February.63

Ossory’s search for an income sufficient to maintain his quality continued, while Ormond worried about him becoming involved in dangerous military exploits. On 16 Apr. 1667 Arlington reported to Ormond progress on a proposed purchase for Ossory of the office of master of the horse from Albemarle. Ormond had delegated the negotiations to Arlington, being adamant that he ensure that Ossory ‘go upon no such causeless adventures’ as may lose him ‘his money in a moment.’ The king refused Albemarle’s request for leave to deal with Ossory, but Ormond remained interested in securing the office for his son. He also wanted Ossory to ‘put a period to those excursions’ which Ormond viewed with apprehension.64 Ormond’s worries were understandable, as on 3 June 1667 Arlington reported that Ossory wanted to join the campaign in Flanders against the Dutch.65 Not surprisingly, the news of the Dutch incursion up the Medway shortly afterwards found the duke in difficulties persuading Ossory to remain in Ireland in case of a French invasion.66 When on 25 June Arlington opined that Ossory’s presence in England was desirable, Ormond gave in. On 2 July Ossory left Dublin, his principal instructions from his father being to serve the king and then the chancellor, Clarendon.67

On 20 July 1667 Ormond wrote further about his attempts to purchase the mastership of the horse for Ossory, and of Clarendon’s apparent opposition to Ossory commanding a ship. According to Ossory, however, Clarendon was supporting his pretensions to a military command. Ossory attended the Lords on 29 July, one of the two days on which Parliament sat before being prorogued. During August Ossory discovered that the king objected to his purchase of the mastership of the horse, a position different from that which Clarendon had led him to believe. Ossory also discussed with Charles II the possibility of serving Spain in Flanders but seems soon to have abandoned the idea, although at the end of November, the French ambassador reported that Ossory had ‘a treaty with them [the house of Austria], to command the corps of English infantry which will be sent to the aid of Flanders in the event of an alliance of England and Holland with Spain’, to force Louis to make peace.68

In September 1667 Ossory’s wife left her husband in London and went to Ireland.69 Ossory’s decision to stay in England may well have been influenced by the political situation. In a letter of 21 Sept. he described the general talk that Ormond ‘will be pushed at this next session’; he could, though ‘learn neither the particular persons that contrive the thing; nor upon what grounds they will move’ in it. Ossory attended on seven days of the resumed session of October to December 1667, just under 14 per cent of the total, being named to one committee. Although his attendance was sparse, Ossory did keep his father informed of parliamentary events and matters pertaining to Ireland. Thus, on 26 Oct, he thought it advisable for Ormond to obtain letters patent to appoint a deputy in case it should become necessary to travel to England to defend himself, an idea which his father rejected. On 29 Oct. he was excused attendance on the House, although he attended on the following day. One reason for his irregular attendance may have been a desire to avoid the proceedings against Clarendon. Certainly the duchess of York believed that Ossory was one of the first to desert her father, a charge he denied, imputing her ill opinion, of him and of Ormond, to the malice of Lady Ranelagh (daughter of Richard Boyle, earl of Cork [I], and sister of Roger Boyle‡, earl of Orrery [I]).70

Ossory remained alert to the possibility of an attack on his father. On 13 Dec. 1667 he was able to reassure Ormond that Edward Seymour‡ was inclined to ascribe any miscarriages in the affairs of Ireland to others, rather than to the duke. Ossory also commented that Clarendon’s address and petition presented to the Lords on 3 Dec. was ‘so mean and extravagant’, that it was likely to prejudice other ministers who might also be accused, presumably including his father. On 21 Dec., two days after the adjournment of the session, Ossory informed his father that an indisposition would prevent his planned journey to Ireland but that his father should write to the king upon Irish affairs, chiefly the revenue and the charges on the Irish establishment. In January 1668 Ossory continued to inform Ormond about Irish business in London and the possible threats to his position. On 14 Jan. he informed him of the offer made by Charles Howard, styled viscount Andover, the future 2nd earl of Berkshire, to mediate between Ormond and Buckingham.71 Ossory also attended at the treasury when Irish matters were under discussion in January and February 1668.72

On 7 Feb. 1668, the king wrote a letter to Ormond appointing Ossory as lord deputy during his intended absence in England.73 Thus, when the session resumed in February 1668, Ossory sat for only a further five days. On 17 Feb. he was excused attendance. He sat for the last time on 19 Feb. and on the 24th he was granted leave of absence, as he was going ‘speedily’ into Ireland on the king’s business and intended to leave his proxy. On that very day his proxy was registered with York. Back in Ireland by the time of Ormond’s departure for England on 24 Apr., Ossory was sworn lord deputy, and for the next few months he kept up a stream of letters informing his father of developments in Ireland.74 In particular, Ossory was concerned that his father maintain a good relationship with Arlington, and on 22 Aug. 1668 he evinced some relief that Ormond had a good understanding with his brother-in-law. He advised his father to preserve this friendship as it had been steady in the duke’s absence from England, and especially as it was so dear to Ossory himself.75

Now in England herself, Ossory’s mother discovered how extravagant he had been during his stay in London. On 22 Nov. 1668, she wrote rather scathingly to Ormond’s half-brother, George Mathew, that Ossory was ‘indebted to many tradesmen here, who complain of him to be a bad paymaster.’ Worse than that, neither Ossory nor his countess knew how much and to whom they owed money. She ended, despairingly, ‘I know not what course of life they can propose unto themselves if they run out of all compass, after all the help they have had from us both in Ireland and here.’76 When Ormond advised Ossory on 6 Dec. that he should ‘attend, with more than ordinary diligence, his charge; to be just, and soberly affable, to all,’ Ossory responded with a plea on 9 Jan. 1669 that his father promote his employment under the Spanish crown should overtures for his military service be renewed.77

Military aspirations 1669-75

There had been much speculation over whether Ormond would be replaced as lord lieutenant in the winter of 1668-9, and on 3 Feb. 1669, Ormond, feeling the king’s confidence in him to be slipping away, rather revealingly counselled Ossory in Dublin not to let the impertinence or insolence of any person provoke him into losing his temper. By 13 Feb. Arlington was already discussing the implications of a change in the government of Ireland both in general and on Ossory, offering him residence at Goring House, where ‘methinks a little would suffice’ to live on. On 23 Feb., following his father’s confirmation of a change in the government of Ireland, Ossory again expressed a desire to serve abroad, possibly in command of the king’s regiments in Flanders. Ormond reminded him on 14 Mar. that he was not serving as the deputy of John Robartes, 2nd Baron Robartes, but as the king’s.78

Ossory worried about his finances, perhaps constrained by Ormond’s loss of the lieutenancy. The duchess noted on 31 May 1669, he would be discontented at any retrenchment of his allowance in favour of his brother, Richard Butler, earl of Arran [I], and Baron Butler of Weston. On 12 June Ormond stressed that he was not obliged to pay him an annual allowance of £4,000 although the following month Ormond wrote that the duchess had satisfied him that he could charge his estate with £3,000 for Ossory’s allowance.79 However, a few years later Edward Montagu, earl of Sandwich, recorded that Ossory did indeed have £4,000 a year.80

On 18 June 1669 the duchess wrote to her husband that she thought Ossory had been convinced that his scheme for a military command in Flanders was impracticable, but she felt that he wished to establish his family in London and go off himself into Italy, a plan of which she did not approve. On 20 June she added that Ossory seemed determined to leave Ireland, ‘where he might live so nobly’ whilst preserving both the duke’s and his own interest. She blamed Arlington for his attitude.81 On 13 July Sir Nicholas Armourer joined the debate about whether Ossory should stay at Kilkenny or travel to England. He thought the duchess amenable to Ossory coming over to attend Parliament, and hoped that Arlington would be enlisted to help to persuade her, so that they ‘may not bury a brave gentleman in a corner of the world where he can neither serve himself nor friends, and have only the conversation of his own lady and children.’82

Ossory stayed in Ireland until the arrival of Robartes. He left Dublin in September 1669, attended by a vast array of nobility and gentry. He arrived in London in time to attend the opening day of the 1669 session, on 19 October.83 He attended on 31 days of the session, a little over 86 per cent of the total and was named to four committees. He also attended the treasury (with his father) on 26 Jan. 1670, when matters pertaining to the Irish revenue were under discussion and did so on eight further occasions in February, March, May and July 1670.84

Ossory clearly planned to stay in England, the duchess remarking in January 1670 that she feared he and his family ‘will not be able to live within the compass of their allowance, though he has gotten settled upon him since his coming over a thousand a year for his salary, as he is a gentleman of the bedchamber, which will be well paid him.’85 Ossory attended on 31 days of the first part of the session of 1670-71 (February-April 1670), 77.5 per cent of the total. On 28 Mar. he dissented to the passage of the divorce bill of John Manners, Lord Roos, the future 9th earl of Rutland. On 6 Apr. he received proxies from Arlington and Sandwich, which were vacated on 8 Apr. and 27 Oct. respectively. In May 1670, Ossory waited on the king to Dover, where the king’s sister, the duchess of Orleans was engaged in the diplomacy which led to the secret treaty of Dover.86 Another of Ossory’s duties was to bring the prince of Orange over to England for a visit, which was the beginning of their friendship.87

When the parliamentary session resumed on 24 Oct. 1670, Ossory sat on 56 days, a little under 45 per cent of the total, and was named to two committees. Following the attempted kidnapping of Ormond on 6 Dec., Ossory accused Buckingham of being behind the plot, and in the presence of the king, vowed to shoot Buckingham if a violent end should befall his father.88 On 10 Feb. 1671 he was excused attendance on the House and on 13 Feb. he left London to escort the prince of Orange back to Holland.89 On 1 Apr., the duchess informed Mathew that Ossory was not yet returned from Holland and Flanders, and that he intended ‘to see France as I hear, but to what purpose unless to spend money I know not, and to satisfy a vaulting and unsettled humour which he still retains.’90

Ossory continued his efforts to find gainful employment in one military field of action or another. In late August 1671, the French envoy, Colbert, reported to Louis XIV an approach by Ossory with an offer to serve in the armies of the French crown. Arlington, ‘his brother-in-law and intimate friend,’ as Colbert called him, supported his approach in case Buckingham declined to command the troops earmarked for French service.91 In October or November 1671 Ossory’s assistance was sought by the prince of Orange in gaining the king’s permission to raise 3-4,000 troops for service in the United Provinces.92 Ossory also played a full role in the life of the court. At the start of October 1671, he was in attendance, as gentleman of the bedchamber in waiting, on the king and queen during their visit to Norwich.93 On 11 Jan. 1672 John Evelyn reported his own and Ossory’s attendance at a dinner with all five members of the Cabal.94

With Ossory’s ambitions in the army seemingly thwarted, at the start of January 1672 Colbert reported that Ossory had taken a naval commission ‘preferring service at sea to that on land’. According to Arlington, Ossory had only taken command of a ship ‘because his father did not give him enough money to appear in France with as much brilliance as’ James Scott, duke of Monmouth.95 Ossory was slightly wounded at the battle of Sole Bay on 28 May, being bruised on both legs by a splinter.96 Ossory was nominated for a garter on 30 Sept. 1672, probably as a reward for his naval services, and installed on 25 October.97 Ormond had to provide him with £500 towards his expenses. On 16 Nov., a worried duchess wrote to Mathew that Ossory ‘has contracted great debt by his going to sea, and yet runs further inconveniencies of a like nature, neither he nor his lady regarding the ruin that is like to fall very suddenly upon them, which is a great trouble to me that am under difficulties of a like kind by helping him.’98 On 1 Dec. Ossory and three others were granted an annuity of £2,000 p.a. during the life of William Wentworth, earl of Strafford, orders for which were still being issued in July 1678.99

Ossory attended the opening of the 1673 session on 4 Feb., was present on 35 days (84 per cent of the total) and was named to three committees. Again, he seemed under-employed, writing in April to Arthur Capell, earl of Essex, that he would probably visit Ireland in the summer because he was free of foreign engagements.100 That he did not do so was somewhat fortuitous. While visiting the fleet in May, he found it lacking a rear-admiral, a vacancy he volunteered to supply, and which the king accepted.101 As he wrote to Arlington on 19 May: ‘you will hear before this of my not being able to resist the temptation of supplying a vacant flag. Believe me it proceeded most from my desire of expressing my gratitude to so kind a master, and next that I feared the world might unjustly think that having had a signal mark of favour I would sit down with that honour and afterwards manage myself, a meanness I shall never be guilty of.’102 Consequently, he saw action at the first (28 May) and second battles (4 June) of Schooneveld.103 Having tasted action, Ossory ‘returns to sea with the prince, and cannot be persuaded out of it’, a correspondent of Sir Joseph Williamson‡ reported on 20 June.104 On 28 June he arrived back at the fleet.105 In the midst of all this activity, on 10 July 1673, his daughter married William Stanley, 9th earl of Derby, an important alliance for the family. On 11 Aug. Ossory performed heroics at the battle of Texel, and on 14 Aug. Prince Rupert, commander of the fleet, made Ossory his vice-admiral.106 Ossory was keen ‘to fight a second battle’, but by 26 Sept. the Venetian ambassador reported that he had returned to port on hearing that the Dutch fleet had retired for the winter.107 At this point he was at the height of his popularity, as Armourer reported on 23 Sept.: ‘Ossory came up from the Fleet; he is the joy of the Court, City and Country. Good folks are fond on him, and bad thinks it safest to let him alone.’108

Ossory attended the adjournment on 20 Oct. 1673, when Parliament was prorogued. He then attended on each of the four days of the session held in October-November 1673, being named to two committees. Ossory was keen to protect his military reputation, complaining in a petition to the king in October 1673 about the omissions and misrepresentations made by vice-admiral Sir John Kempthorne‡, the result of a dispute about the conduct of the battle of the Texel.109 On 18 Nov. Ossory was despatched to Dover by the king to greet the new duchess of York upon her arrival.110

Ossory attended on every day of the 1674 session which opened on 7 Jan., with the exception of 10 Feb., and was named to two committees. On 12 Jan., together with Francis Newport, 2nd Baron Newport, he introduced Heneage Finch, Baron Finch, into the House. When Arlington was impeached by the Commons and sought to defend himself, Ossory showed his support for his brother-in-law on 15 Jan. by accompanying him to the door of the House.111 On 5 Feb. Ossory received Arlington’s proxy, which was vacated on 11 Feb. when Arlington returned to the Lords.

On 28 Feb. 1674 the prince of Orange wrote to Ossory of his joy at the conclusion of the peace and his hopes of seeing Ossory in Holland.112 Certainly the pull of loyalty to Orange was noted by contemporaries: on 2 Mar., the French ambassador Ruvigny reported to Louis XIV Ossory’s respectful refusal of employment under the French crown, citing Ormond’s need whilst in Ireland for ‘his son to remain at court during this time to prevent his enemies doing him harm’, however, he continued, ‘the true reason is no doubt his attachment to the prince of Orange and the honour he has from being in familiarity with him.’ He added further that only Monmouth’s representations to the king had prevented Ossory from visiting the prince, which was thought an ill example to others.113 On 6 Apr., the Prince wrote again to solicit Ossory’s aid in gaining the king’s permission to raise troops in England, especially as the French had been allowed the privilege. He also thanked Ossory for declining on his account to serve in the French army.114

On 17 June 1674, Ormond, on the verge of departing to Ireland, wrote an illuminating letter to Sir Robert Southwell‡, which revealed the weakness of leaving Ossory as his chief protector in England, namely his lack of attention to detail. In July Ormond was also critical of Ossory’s continuing indebtedness.115 On 31 Oct. 1674, William Harbord‡, Essex’s secretary, reported that all of Ormond’s friends were acting well towards Essex, and ‘particularly Ossory’, who had spoken to the duchess of Portsmouth on his behalf, so he should ‘let the world see the good understanding that is between you.’116

The rejection by William of Orange of the French peace proposals in the autumn of 1674 led Charles II to send Arlington and Ossory on a mission to change his mind. Ossory was also to endeavour to get the prince to ask for the hand of Princess Mary, but was not to propose it formally. Ossory, Arlington and Edward Osborne‡, styled Viscount Latimer, departed on 10 November.117 In public it was noted that they ‘are not ambassadors, nor have any character or commission, but they have instructions under the king’s hand, but what they are, is not known.’118 On the question of marriage to his cousin, the prince preferred to wait until after the war, but Ossory wrote a carelessly worded report, as he put it, ‘by making a comma instead of a full stop, the critics would infer, that I had made the offer first.’119 On his return to England, Ossory told his father that his role in the marriage negotiations was to deal with matters for York, while Arlington handled negotiations for the king. As Ossory correctly noted the king was the driving force behind the match and York ‘liked not the thing from the first’. A further benefit of the visit was the offer by the prince to Ossory of a military command, although by the end of February 1675 this idea had been laid aside.120

Final years 1675-80

On 30 Jan. 1675, while in the drawing room at Whitehall, Ossory was challenged by Henry Bulkeley‡, a younger son of Thomas Bulkeley, viscount Bulkeley [I], for which Bulkeley was committed to the Tower.121 The cause of the challenge was probably Bulkeley’s wife, Sophia Stuart, a maid of honour to Queen Catherine. In due course Bulkeley was released and forced to beg Ossory’s pardon.122 In March 1675 Ossory was involved in a dispute with Anglesey, over the fate of Katherine Fitzgerald, daughter of John Fitzgerald of Dromana, co. Waterford and heiress to a large estate, known as the ‘Decies’. Ossory was one of the trustees of her estate, as was Richard Power, earl of Tyrone [I], who had originally been granted the estate by the Crown before the grant was vacated.123 Tyrone’s plan was to marry her to his own heir, John, with the consent of her guardian, Anglesey (who was also Power’s grandfather), but she was unwilling to marry him and took refuge with Ossory.124 On 25 Mar. Anglesey requested her return, and when Ossory refused, on 31 Mar. he petitioned the Privy Council.125 Ossory’s response that she ‘came voluntarily to him and desired him to be her guardian’ was backed up by the young lady herself.126 She subsequently married Edward Villiers, the then heir of George Villiers, 4th viscount Grandison [I].

Ossory attended on 28 days of the session of April-June 1675, nearly 67 per cent of the total, and was named to two committees. He attended on 17 days of the session of October-November 1675, 81 per cent of the total, and was again named to two committees. On 10 Oct. Ossory received the proxy of Philip Herbert, 7th earl of Pembroke, which was vacated on 8 November. On 15 Nov. Ossory received his father’s proxy, which remained in force for the remainder of the session. On 20 Nov. he was one of the Lords who argued against the motion for an address to the king in support of the dissolution of Parliament. His name appeared on a list of those opposing the address.127

On 4 Mar. 1676 the king granted Ossory £14,000 in consideration of his losses and charges in the royal service, with the money to be paid out of the Irish revenue over a period of 6 years.128 On 30 June 1676 Ossory attended the trial of Charles Cornwallis, 3rd Baron Cornwallis, and found him not guilty.129 On 8 July and 13 Aug. Evelyn mentioned dining with Arlington, and on both occasions Ossory was also present.130 In November Ossory was appointed chamberlain to the queen; his diligence in office led to rumours that he consoled the queen over her husband’s infidelities.131

The 1677-8 session began on 15 Feb. Ossory attended on 44 days of the first part of the session up to the adjournment on 16 Apr. 1677, nearly 90 per cent of the total, and was named to 16 committees. At around this date Ossory was marked as ‘twice vile’ on Shaftesbury’s list of lay peers. After the end of the session, Ossory was keen to facilitate his father’s accession to the lord lieutenancy of Ireland in place of Essex.132 Ossory, too, gained from the political changes, his name being included when a warrant was issued for a new commission of the admiralty on 19 May, although the commission itself was not issued until late September.133 Ossory then attended on all five days of that part of the session held 21-28 May 1677. He attended the adjournment of the House on 16 July 1677, and that night set out to ‘compliment’ the prince of Orange then on campaign.134 The prince was trenchantly criticized by his Spanish allies for the abandonment of the siege of Charleroi in August: they suspected Ossory of delivering orders from Charles II not to fight.135 Ossory had certainly issued advice not to fight through Alexander Colyear, the prince’s Scottish adjutant general, though William denied that it was the reason for his deciding to lift the siege.136 On 6 Oct. Ossory was at The Hague, and expected back in England with the Prince of Orange, who was to marry Princess Mary on 4 November.137

Two days after the marriage, on 6 Nov. 1677, Ormond sent a detailed letter to Ossory concerning the latter’s desire to serve as head of the English forces in the United Provinces. Following the prince of Orange’s departure on 19 Nov. Ossory spent part of the following day with Southwell getting to grips with the Irish revenue accounts sent over by Ormond.138 On 30 Nov. (or possibly 1 Dec.) Ossory fought a duel with Henry Bulkeley, for which he was sharply rebuked by the king.139 The occasion was, as in 1675, a chance encounter at court, and the reason ‘the old quarrel about Mr B’s.’140 Ossory attended the adjournment of the House on 3 Dec. 1677.

On 1 Jan. 1678, Coventry informed Ormond that Ossory had received leave to visit Holland.141 On 5 Jan. Ormond wrote, ‘I am fully satisfied with my son Ossory’s voyage and design,—which I cannot say of all he has laid and taken’, although, as he wrote to Arran, ‘I gave your brother [Ossory], the best advice and the most pertinent caution I could, but I fear his haste to be in action will transport him beyond his prudence.’142 The purpose of Ossory’s visit was to negotiate with the Dutch for the use of English troops.143 According to Daniel Finch, the future 2nd earl of Nottingham, Ossory had adjusted the terms for English troops in the Dutch service so as to gain them an extra penny a day, with himself as commander-in-chief.144 Parliament met again on 15 Jan., having been adjourned since April. Ossory attended for 10 days of the renewed session which lasted until May 1678 (just over 16 per cent of the total), last sitting on 14 February. He was reported to have gone that day for Holland.145 On 18 Feb. he landed in Holland, where he delivered a letter from York to the prince.146 On 22 Feb. Laurence Hyde, the future earl of Rochester, reported that Ossory ‘was much dissatisfied with the account he found here of that part of the army he is general of.’147 Ossory’s journeys into Holland prevented him from being an effective advocate for his father in Whitehall, a task which fell to his brother Arran. Ossory was resentful at not being consulted, but as the duke pointed out ‘your motions must depend on the king of France’ and as Arran and Secretary Coventry ‘will show you all they receive from me… you may take what part you please.’148 In March 1678 Ossory wrote to Thomas Osborne, earl of Danby, from Bonn concerning the need to establish a perfect understanding between Danby and his father, a topic he had talked to the lord treasurer about the day before he left London, and to which his father had responded favourably.149

On 15 June 1678 Arran wrote that Ossory having lately come over he had consulted him about business, but he had left it to Arran to deal with. On 22 June Ormond wrote to Ossory expressing his reservations about his proposed service with the Dutch army, though accepting that ‘if a considerable body of the king’s subjects shall be kept on foot it may be proper enough for you to accept the command of them’, provided that the king and York approved and the expense did not leave him out of pocket. Meanwhile, Arran informed Ossory of discussions about Irish affairs in council ‘and therefore you should do well to be frequently there.’150

Ossory attended on 17 days of the session that ran from May-July 1678, 39.5 per cent of the total, and was named to four committees. He made his first appearance on 14 June and his last on 8 July, the day on which he registered his proxy with York. On 10 July Ossory, ‘going into Holland to command the English forces’, took his leave of Evelyn. By mid July he was at Middelburg in Zealand. He saw action at the battle of Saint-Denis on 4-5 Aug., it being reported that ‘the English under Lord Ossory, who had the vanguard, have the honour of a great share of this victory’.151 He was briefly back in England in August 1678 but soon returned to the continent for by 30 Aug. 1678 he was waxing lyrical from The Hague about the relative merits of becoming a hermit as opposed to soldiering.152 Favourable views of Ossory’s conduct continued. In September Dr Francis Turner, the future bishop of Ely, wrote of Ossory’s services to the Church during his command in Flanders:

this noble Lord set up as zealously for his own religion as they for theirs. He brought over a discreet, learned and devout man as his chaplain ... He set up daily prayers in the field and it was a brave sight to see the duke of Ormond’s eldest son kneeling with his blue Garter in the dirt. He gave an excellent good example by coming himself to communion. And now within this fortnight he has gained this point, that not one papist or Irish (which hardly need be distinguished) shall be put into any vacancy as commands fall void.153

Ossory and Laurence Hyde (who was ambassador to The Hague) returned to England in September 1678. As Ormond wrote to the Irish lord chancellor, Michael Boyle, on 21 Sept., if Ossory stayed at court, ‘we shall have all the assistance he can give us’ in the struggle over another bill to confirm the Irish land settlement.154 However, Ossory did not remain at court, as later that month he was designated to act as ‘governor’ to the duchess of York and Princess Anne on their visit incognito into Holland and duly conveyed them across at the beginning of October.155

Ossory had returned by 20 Oct. 1678, and attended the Lords on the following day. In all he attended on 57 days of the October-December 1678 session of the Cavalier Parliament, nearly 92 per cent of the total, and was named to six committees. On 23 Oct., Ossory told his father that, as he put it, ‘upon my giving the House the occasion, falling out naturally upon a motion relating to Ireland, of your banishing priests and disarming Romanists’, Strafford had said that the Papists were ‘strangely insolent in several places of the kingdom, namely Waterford and Dublin’, claiming that ‘proclamations were pulled from the posts after they had been a second time set up; my reply was that what link-boys did (such I suppose those actors were if any) was not worth minding.’156 The occasion for this defence of his father was probably the motion for an address to banish papists from the royal palaces, London and Westminster.

Ossory was also fulfilling the role of his father’s advocate in Whitehall and at the treasury. With this in view Ormond suggested on 26 Oct. 1678 that ‘when you have a mind to be informed of the affairs of this place you must take pains to be it sufficiently, and not venture your interposition in them without full information; if you do you will be under great disadvantage, and some will be glad to find you so.’ Ormond recommended consulting Coventry, Southwell and Sir Cyril Wyche‡, for

I know you are not apt to undertake the reading of volumes, and of such consist what has been transmitted hence concerning the revenue, the bills, the Lord Ranelagh’s accounts, the difference betwixt the farmers, and the matters relating to the Plot. But your way will be to single out what you most affect to be perfect in, and from these persons you may have satisfaction.

On 29 Oct. Ossory wrote to Ormond that ‘we are so taken up with either the House or committees as I have scarce time to think of anything else,’ although he was keen to know whether his father would part with his office of lord steward and his views about the promised English dukedom.157 On 15 Nov. he voted against the motion that the declaration against transubstantiation should be under the same penalty as the oaths. On 16 Nov. he noted the twin calls on his time when he wrote ‘I have very little time by waiting on the House and queen.’ On 23 Nov. he was nominated to report from a conference on the bill disabling Papists. On 26 Nov. he protected his father’s back by telling the king how active Orrery was in ‘alarming all persons in Ireland and here with his informations of the dangerous posture of affairs by the desperate condition the Protestants and English took themselves to be in by the multitude and evil designs of the Irish.’158

As chamberlain to the queen, Ossory had a minor official role in the aftermath of the revelations of the Popish Plot. On 8 Nov. 1678 Ossory and Charles Gerard, Baron Gerard of Brandon, were ordered by the Lords to search the queen’s residence at Somerset House for arms, papers and suspicious persons. On 9 Nov. they reported their somewhat meagre findings to the House, whereupon several suspected persons were discharged. In a letter to his mother on 30 Nov., Ossory was able to note that he and John Egerton, 2nd earl of Bridgwater, had caught Titus Oates in ‘a manifest lie’, as signified in the report presented to the Lords on 29 Nov. of their visit to Somerset House in the company of Oates. That same letter recorded his feelings on the Lords’ debates of 29 Nov. where he stated that although he had been in actions of importance, he had never been more troubled than he was the previous day while the Lords were debating on whether both Houses should join in an address to the king to remove the queen from the king’s presence.159

On 17 Dec. Ossory revealed the usefulness of his bedchamber post when he wrote to his father: ‘this morning I happened to discourse of many things with the king when we were both in bed, it being my turn to wait in the bed-chamber. I told him my intentions of visiting the command I had in your army when things here could permit, which he approved.’160 On 26 Dec. the Lords had before them the examination of Miles Prance, taken by Monmouth and Ossory by order of the Privy Council two days before, on Godfrey’s murder and the Plot. Also on 26 Dec. Ossory voted to insist upon the Lords’ amendment to the supply bill relating to the payment of money into the Exchequer and on 27 Dec. he voted against the motion to commit Danby.

Ossory made a short visit to Ireland early in 1679, but was back in Whitehall on 8 February.161 On the following day, after the monarch had dined at the duchess of Portsmouth’s lodgings, Ossory took the opportunity to deliver to the king a letter from Ormond and to talk about Ormond’s office of lord steward. On 15 Feb. Ossory was able to report that the king had promised to do nothing about Ormond’s post without further consultations with Ossory. Rumours at that time had earmarked the post as a retreat for Danby, should he be forced to quit the treasury. On 22 Feb. Ossory reported a further conversation with the king, aimed at alerting him to the efforts of Ormond’s enemies, and a long discourse with Danby on Ireland, coupled with an offer by Ossory to join in any prosecution against their mutual foe, Buckingham. Ossory attended on five of the six days of the short March 1679 session, just over 83 per cent of the total and was named to three committees.

Ossory attended on all but two days of the session of March-May 1679 (he missed 27 Mar. and 11 Apr.), just over 97 per cent of the total and was named to three committees. Ossory’s name appeared on four lists of those peers likely to support Danby in about March-April 1679. On one list Danby’s son, Peregrine Osborne, the future 2nd duke of Leeds, was deputed to lobby him. Another probably listed those peers that had voted against the early stages of the Danby attainder bill. On 4 Apr. he voted against the passage of the bill and on 14 Apr. he voted against agreeing with the Commons on the attainder bill. On 20 Mar. 1679 Ormond wrote to Ossory about the libels circulating against his conduct of the Irish government. He was deputed to ask the king to ensure that his servants provided Ormond with some protection, at least until he could be heard in person. Meanwhile, Ossory was doing his best to defend his father in the Lords. On 22 Mar. he reported the events on 20 Mar. at the committee examining the Plot, where Strafford had spoken of the dangerous condition of Ireland, an attack encouraged by George Savile, Viscount Halifax, and by Shaftesbury. Although not present at that meeting, Ossory noted that being named one of the committee, ‘I have attended, and will continue to do so both morning and evening.’162

On 25 Mar. 1679 Shaftesbury made a speech dealing with Scotland and then Ireland, which ended with a motion that the Lords fix a day for taking into consideration the state of Ireland.163 Although Shaftesbury later maintained that this speech was aimed at John Maitland, duke of Lauderdale [S], Ossory perceived it as concerning Irish security. He responded that the duke of Monmouth, as general, should provide an answer, ‘as I averred he undertook that all the officers and soldiers were Protestants and had taken the oaths’, and that as to other things relating to the security of the kingdom, he would provide them with an account.164 The House then ordered a committee for 31 Mar. to inquire into the state of Ireland and Ossory was told to ‘bring into this House such orders as are come to his hands relating thereunto.’165 Ossory duly took advice from several friends, including Southwell, Wyche, Colonel Edward Vernon, and Francis Aungier‡, 3rd Baron Longford [I]. Wyche seems to have been minded to ask the Lords for time for Ormond to send over his own ‘perfect narrative, which will at once satisfy their Lordships and clearly answer all those scandalous libels or false reports or malicious interpretations which have filled the town.’ Ormond, too, was sceptical of the efficacy of Ossory’s actions, being unsure as to what exactly he had committed himself to produce: ‘if it be put in writing it is exposed to the objections of witty men resolved to mislike it beforehand, and for a discourse it must be too long’ (although he was impressed by the document actually produced, writing on 7 Apr. that it ‘could not be composed to more advantage, nor anything added to it but what has been lately done, of which Mr Secretary Coventry has an account from me and the council’).166

On 31 Mar. Ossory duly presented to the House an account of the government’s actions in Ireland. During the ensuing debate in a committee of the whole Ossory launched a defence of his father and an attack on Shaftesbury. After recounting his past services in Ireland and for the protestant cause, including rescuing the young Henry Stuart, duke of Gloucester, from the clutches of Queen Henrietta Maria, Ossory outlined what he had not done. The speech was in effect an attack on Shaftesbury: ‘he never advised the breaking of the triple league. He never advised the shutting up of the exchequer. He never advised the declaration for toleration. He never advised the falling out with the Dutch, and joining with France. He was not author of that most excellent position, Delenda est carthago, that the interest of England should be destroyed’.167 The speech (translated into Dutch) and the paper that Ossory had presented to the House on 31 Mar. were both printed. On 12 Apr. Southwell explained to Ormond that the printing, ‘is hitherto only restrained by the caution of printing that which may be now called a proceeding in that House. But this is only a stop till others advise the leaping over it,’ a problem quickly surmounted by the Butlers’ Dutch contacts, as Southwell confirmed on the 15th when he wrote that ‘I have been this afternoon with my Dutch friend and committed to his care the printing that extract’ that Ossory had presented.168 On 22 Apr. the prince of Orange to wrote to congratulate Ossory on it.169 Shaftesbury later complained that Ossory had mistaken the object of his criticism; it was Colonel Fitzpatrick, Ormond’s Catholic brother-in-law, rather than Ormond whom he meant to attack.170

Ossory was also active in attempting to defend his father informally, as he did when dining with Charles Powlett, 6th marquess of Winchester, on 25 Mar. 1679. On 12 Apr. Ossory was also able to assure Ormond that he had inserted in the London Gazette ‘those things done in Ireland in order to let the world see your care for preventing any mischief from the Irish’.171 On 15 Apr. 1679, in the committee of the whole on the state of Ireland, Shaftesbury produced a copy of Colonel Fitzpatrick’s grant, ‘casting many reflections upon it and upon the person’. In response Ossory ‘promised to inquire how the matter stood, and would speak of it with... Longford, in whose name this grant for Fitzpatrick passed.’ Ossory also asked his father for information of instances of his endeavours to procure Protestant tenants and assured the duchess of his support for Fitzpatrick but that ‘so violent and unjust were the proceedings of some, that no opposition could be made’. Furthermore, he had shown Shaftesbury ‘a reference favourable enough in behalf of Fitzpatrick when his lordship was one of the treasury’, assuring the earl that he would ‘make no ill use of it if he would not more persecute this gentleman, and that if he would give us fair quarter we would live upon good terms.’ Ormond endorsed this approach, noting that if Shaftesbury was not satisfied they were no worse off than before.172

On 17 Apr. Ossory was one of seven peers deputed by the Lords to attend the king to ask him to order Ormond to put the laws into execution for disarming papists, and to help in arming the Protestants there so as to defend their religion, and for enforcing other anti-papist legislation. He was left out of the remodelled Privy Council instituted in April 1679, although, as Ossory put it, the king made ‘very kind excuses’ that he was not included in the new body.173 In late April 1679 Ossory alerted the king to rumours that Ranelagh was promoting articles of impeachment against his father.174 He also sought further information from his father to enable him ‘to stop the mouths of such who exclaim against vast gifts, though obtained by the most legal ways and honest grounds’.175 On 10 May Ossory voted against appointing a joint committee of both Houses to consider the method of proceeding against the impeached Lords. On 14 May he dissented from the resolution that the bill regulating the trials of peers should pass. On 27 May he probably voted for the right of the bishops to stay in the House during capital cases.

Ossory was not free from concerns on the domestic front either. His daughter was having difficulties with her husband, Derby, to whose ‘brutality and ill-usage’, Ossory referred in a letter to his father. He continued to feel uneasy at the political situation. On 23 July, when the king held a conference with Arlington, Essex, Sunderland, Clarendon, and Halifax on the queen’s affairs, Ossory was excluded. He thought this resulted from the ‘king’s complaisance not to mingle me with company unto which I was not acceptable’, although Arlington affected to believe it was merely an oversight by William Chiffinch‡ in neglecting to call him as the king had asked for him to be present.176

Ossory’s shaky finances were threatened by plans to retrench expenditure in the royal household. As he wrote on 28 June 1679: ‘the loss I receive is more than anybody’s of the court, having considerable salaries in the king’s and queen’s service.’ He was more sanguine on 5 July, when he wrote to his father of his hopes of being chosen to compliment the Spanish king on his marriage, remarking that ‘if about October things absolutely necessary does [sic] not require my being here, I should not be sorry to have a just cause of absence’ from Parliament. Ormond was sceptical that his plans would provide any financial reward and feared that not even his expenses would be covered given the increasingly frugal atmosphere at court. Arlington pitched in with his view that by carrying a jewel to the new Spanish queen, the king’s niece, Ossory would gain honour from such a task, and Ossory continued to keep this project in mind during the autumn, even writing in September that ‘my Spanish journey is resolved and I am promised money to support it.’177

In July 1679 Ossory was relieved at the acquittal of Sir George Wakeham, the queen’s physician, believing that this would discourage attempts to bring charges against the queen.178 By 9 Aug. 1679 his mind had turned to preparing Ormond’s defence against a possible attack in the forthcoming Parliament: in particular an answer was necessary to the addresses made by the Lords in the preceding session relating to Ireland. One matter, in particular, was looked upon as difficult, the lax manner in which, in at least one case, that of ‘young Aylmer’, Irish youths had been allowed to be brought up as Catholics, especially as Ormond and Ossory had been bound for £10,000 to ensure he was educated a Protestant. By 20 Sept. Ossory had had further thoughts on the forthcoming Parliament (still scheduled to sit in October), warning his father that ‘you may be sure that those who wish ill to the government will endeavour all they can against you’, although ‘they may have so many things on their hands, as that you may not this session whether short or long be troubled.’ He also mooted the suggestion that Ormond should sue out his pardon as Monmouth and Lauderdale were doing, even if this might encourage his enemies. Three days later he was alarmed by rumours of an intended impeachment against Ormond.179

On 21 Oct. 1679, Ossory, together with Feversham, accompanied York when he dined with the Artillerymen at Merchant Taylors’ Hall.180 That month plans for Ossory’s Spanish trip appeared to have been revived, but by 11 Nov. the king seems to have changed his mind.181 With the prospect of Parliament sitting in January 1680, on 29 Nov. Ossory returned to the subject of preparing for the session, gathering material to show how the Irish government had responded to the addresses of the Lords relating to Ireland presented to the king in the previous session.182 In December 1679 he failed to pay Monmouth the compliment of visiting him out of respect to the king, a position made potentially trickier by the rumours that Monmouth had returned to England on the advice of the prince of Orange. Ossory did not believe this story and in this he proved to be correct.183

On 13 Dec. 1679 Ossory was reporting on the debates in the Irish committee of the Privy Council on the Irish bill of settlement, and the activities of Essex therein to undermine Ormond. Ossory had to admit that he had not read the act, but would ‘endeavour to inform myself of it by a breviate promised me.’ Similarly, Ossory was uneasy over the potential embarrassment his father might face over the promotion of Thomas Otway, bishop of Killala, confessing on 6 Jan. 1680, ‘I have a horror for a man in holy orders that has imbrued his hands in blood,’ a reference to the cleric ordering the death of an Irish tory captive in his house.184 In the early months of 1680, Ossory was seeking a commission in the Dutch forces.185 Money as ever posed a problem. On 31 Mar. Ormond succinctly summed up Ossory’s dilemma: the prince of Orange’s ‘passionately obliging’ letter made it difficult for Ossory to quit his service, but he nevertheless ‘ought to find some fit means to let him know how much the world is mistaken in the opulence of your family and that such sums as must be spent answerable to your quality and post do incommode you.’186

With Parliament prorogued, and some prominent politicians going into overt opposition, it seemed that Ossory’s political prospects at home were picking up. Humphrey Prideaux, the future dean of Norwich, wrote on 24 Feb. 1680 that Ossory ‘will now come in play again, for they say the king hath declared that he will have a court of his own.’187 As part of the political crackdown, in March, at Newmarket, Ossory had the delicate task of forbidding his brother-in-law, William Cavendish, styled Lord Cavendish, the future duke of Devonshire, from coming into the king’s presence for refusing to kiss York’s hand.188 Ossory had been the channel through which York had sent a conciliatory message to Cavendish, but Cavendish had ignored it and courted Monmouth.189 On 2 Apr., Sir William Waller‡ waited on Ossory, claiming that neither he nor Shaftesbury ‘had said anything that might anyways reflect upon him as being concerned in the Irish Popish Plot so much talked of, and that they were both sorry the town should name them the authors of so scandalous a report.’190 Ossory was particularly annoyed by the attendant coffee house rumours that he and his father were intent on betraying Ireland to France, and was consulting lawyers to see if he could obtain redress.191

On 4 Apr. 1680 Ossory again wrote to Arran to say that he had no thoughts of parting with his Dutch employment. However, he was also keen to alert his brother to the manoeuvres taking place against their father, orchestrated by Shaftesbury and Essex, and backed up by Irish informants.192 On 10 Apr. Ossory warned his father that if it were decided to hold a Parliament in Ireland it would provide further opportunities for an attack by Essex.193 Ossory attended the prorogation on 15 Apr. 1680 and on the 17th he informed his father that he had been recalled to the Privy Council.194 At this point it was the intention that Lady Ossory would travel to Ireland, with Ossory following her after the council had dealt with the Irish bills.195 However, as Ormond pointed out, it might take the council a long time to go through them, especially with Anglesey, Radnor and Essex involved, and although Ormond doubted Ossory’s ability to scrutinize legislation, ‘there may be so many other good uses of your being at court that I desire you would not quit it till you and I are agreed of the time.’196 On 15 May Ossory noted that ‘I do constantly attend the council, and whenever it meets, as sometimes it does on the sudden, I immediately repair from hence unto it.’197 He also attended the prorogation on 17 May.

The coming to maturity of his eldest son, James Butler, the future 2nd duke of Ormond, presented Ossory with an opportunity to rescue his increasingly parlous finances by means of an advantageous marriage. Finances, too, may have played a part in his response, on 25 May, to Laurence Hyde’s information that both the king and York favoured Ossory to command the grenadier guards. He had declined, ‘thinking it was not decent for one of my quality that had served, to get by money a military employment, were I rich enough to do it.’198 He was, however, still involved in securing a Dutch commission. On 5 June 1680, Ossory wrote that ‘I hear the States General have ordered my commission of general, but I cannot learn what they have done as to my appointments, in which, if I find not satisfaction to some reasonable degree, I shall soon return it unto them again.’ He was also having trouble with his eyes.199 Ossory was one of 15 privy councillors ordered to attend the court of chancery on 15 June, as a witness to the king’s declaration that he had never been married to anyone but the queen.200

On 24 June 1680 it was reported that Ossory would command the expedition to Tangier.201 Francis Gwyn‡ noted that a force of 4,000 foot and 600 horse had been ordered to accompany the new governor. However, Ossory believed this to be inadequate to the task. He attended the prorogation on 1 July, the last day upon which he sat. The king signed the commissions for raising the men for Tangier on 13 July. About four days later, Ossory fell ill of a fever, ‘with a latent malignity’. Initially, Arlington felt relieved that this meant that Ossory could not command at Tangier, and that this would be welcome to him for ‘never man was put upon a thing so against his mind, as being of so hazardous an event in point of reputation (as he thought and not without reason).’ Evelyn also noted Ossory’s fears that the forces allocated to him were insufficient.202 After long periods of delirium, in which he appeared to be obsessed by the difficult task facing him in Tangier, Ossory died on the evening of 30 July.203 According to the post-mortem his ‘brain was found full of blood and water, insomuch that the white part of it was discoloured, his lungs was very black ... but they and all the entrails were sound.’204 Evelyn was left to lament the loss of ‘a sincere friend, a brave soldier, a virtuous courtier, a loyal subject, an honest man, a bountiful master, and good Christian.’205

One newsletter referred to Ossory being ‘very much lamented in court, being a person every way accomplished for valour and of unsuspected integrity both to his prince and country.’206 Sir Charles Lyttelton‡ perceived Ossory’s death as a blow to both Ormond and Arlington, ‘whose interest he did both mightily support; for he was in very good credit at court, as he was everywhere else, which makes his loss the more to be lamented.’207 Ormond was devastated by Ossory’s death, referring in a letter to Arlington of 9 Aug. to the confidence and reliance he placed upon him. To Lady Clancarty, he prayed for forgetfulness, the memory of Ossory only generating anguish in him.208

Ossory’s body was laid temporarily and ‘very privately’ in the duke of Monmouth’s vault in Henry VII’s chapel in Westminster Abbey.209 It was not until 13 Nov. 1680 that a proper burial service was held, conducted by Stephen Crespion, confessor to the royal household.210 Ossory did not leave a will. During his illness he had expressed a desire to make one, but Arlington had diverted him, arguing that it was unnecessary because all Ossory needed to do was ‘to recommend your wife and children to your father, and to him likewise the payment of your debts and gratification of your servants, and this, if you choose, I will do in your name; which he seemed very well to accept of, and never more mentioned it.’ Arlington also cited Ossory’s practice before embarking on campaign, of leaving ‘a short paper to me which contained the same things in effect’, and particularly beseeching Ormond to increase his wife’s jointure.211 On 21 Aug. 1680, Mulys wrote to Mathew to suggest that Ormond write to Sir Stephen Fox‡ ‘to concern himself in getting in such money as is in arrear’ and due to the countess from ‘public funds.’212 The countess of Ossory would have considerable difficulty in ensuring that she received all that was due to her from the state.213

In March 1693, a draft of the patent for Ossory’s son, Charles Butler, earl of Arran [I], to be Baron Butler of Weston referred to Ossory as being ‘particularly known to us [the king], esteemed and loved by us as our friend, for his signal affection and services to us, wherefore we are the more pleased to see that those virtues which the world seemed to be deprived of by his untimely death, are revived and flourish in his sons.’214 His virtues were eulogized and immortalized by John Dryden in Absalom and Achitopel.215

S.N.H.

  • 1 Bodl. Carte 213, ff. 647-8.
  • 2 Evelyn Diary, iii. 2.
  • 3 Boyle, Corresp. iii. 298.
  • 4 Carte, Life of Ormond, iv. 606; Collins Peerage (1812 edn) ix. 130.
  • 5 CSP Ire. 1660-62, p. 22; CSP Ire. 1663-65, pp. 597-8.
  • 6 CSP Ire. 1660-62, p. 141.
  • 7 CSP Ire. 1660-62, p. 161.
  • 8 CSP Ire. 1666-69, p. 85; Bodl. Carte 46, f. 284.
  • 9 HMC Var. ii. 394.
  • 10 Add. 28938, ff. 50-51; HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 305.
  • 11 CSP Dom. 1676-7, p. 420.
  • 12 Firth and Davies, Regimental Hist. of Cromwell’s Army, 198, 488, 682.
  • 13 Bodl. Carte 41, f. 262; Dalton, Irish Army Lists 1661-85, 4, 133; CSP Ire.
  • 14 Dalton, Irish Army Lists 1661-85, 7, 131; Bodl. Carte 39, ff. 179-180.
  • 15 Bodl. Carte 59, f. 226; Dalton, Irish Army Lists 1661-85, 128; CSP Dom.
  • 16 Bodl. Carte 42, f. 112.
  • 17 CSP Ire. 1663-65, p. 625; CSP Dom. 1680-1, p. 34.
  • 18 HP Commons, 1660-90, i. 756.
  • 19 Bodl. Carte 37, f. 486.
  • 20 R. East, Portsmouth Recs. 361.
  • 21 13 Car. II (stat. 2) c.3.
  • 22 Chaplin, Corp. of Trinity House, 12, 56.
  • 23 Grammont Mems. (1846), 107.
  • 24 Burnet, History, ii. 611-12.
  • 25 CCSP, iii. 84.
  • 26 Dukes of Ormonde, ed. Barnard and Fenelon, 25.
  • 27 CCSP, iv. 343.
  • 28 Dukes of Ormonde, 23; CCSP, iv. 412.
  • 29 TNA, PC 2/55, stamped pp. 72r-73.
  • 30 CTB, 1660-70, pp. 21, 179, 224; CSP Dom. 1660-1, p. 522; CSP Dom. 1661-2, pp. 147, 276.
  • 31 Schoenfeld, Restored House of Lords, 208; Burghclere, Life of Ormonde, ii.
  • 32 Bodl. Carte 42, f. 629; LJ [I], i. 327.
  • 33 Restoration Ire. ed. C. Dennehy, 49; Bodl. Carte 43, ff. 357-8.
  • 34 Bodl. Carte 33, ff. 403-404; 220, ff. 141-142.
  • 35 CSP Ire. 1664-65, p. 640.
  • 36 Bodl. Carte 46, f. 239.
  • 37 CSP Ire. 1666-69, p. 44; Bodl. Carte 46, f. 264; HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 263.
  • 38 Bodl. Carte 34, f. 673.
  • 39 Bodl. Add. C 306, f. 180.
  • 40 Bodl. Carte 46, ff. 279-280.
  • 41 CSP Ire., 1666-69, p. 83.
  • 42 CTB 1669-72, p. 767; CSP Dom. 1665-6, pp. 412.
  • 43 Bodl. Carte 46, f. 315; CSP Dom. 1665-6, pp. 424, 430-2.
  • 44 Bodl. Carte 51, f. 180; CSP Ire. 1666-69, p. 129.
  • 45 Bodl. Carte 35, f. 1.
  • 46 CSP Ire. 1666-69, p.163.
  • 47 CSP Dom. 1666-7, p. 126.
  • 48 CP, x. 155.
  • 49 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 378-9.
  • 50 Bodl. Carte 46, ff. 387-388.
  • 51 Bodl. Carte 217, ff. 336-337.
  • 52 Pepys, Diary, vii. 342-3.
  • 53 Bodl. Carte 34, ff. 459-460.
  • 54 T. Brown, Miscellanea Aulica (1702), 244-6.
  • 55 CSP Ire. 1666-69, p.230.
  • 56 The Stuart Courts, ed. Cruickshanks, 175.
  • 57 Pepys Diary, vii. 376; Haley, Shaftesbury, 190.
  • 58 Bodl. Carte 217, ff. 354-355.
  • 59 Bodl. Carte 35, ff. 146-147.
  • 60 Bodl. Carte 217, ff. 362-363.
  • 61 PA, HL/PO/CO/1/2, p. 164.
  • 62 CSP Ire. 1666-69, p. 277.
  • 63 CSP Dom. 1666-7, pp. 504, 507-8; CSP Ire. 1666-69, p. 294.
  • 64 Bodl. Carte 221, ff. 109-110; 51, ff. 319, 323-4; 46, ff. 476-7.
  • 65 Bodl. Carte 46, ff. 486-7.
  • 66 CSP Ire. 1666-69, pp. 380-1.
  • 67 Bodl. Carte 46, f. 496; 48, f. 463; CSP Ire. 1666-9, p. 391.
  • 68 Bodl. Carte 48, f. 207; 219, ff. 264-5; 220, ff. 268, 270, 272-3; TNA, PRO 31/3/117, pp. 39-41.
  • 69 Cheshire and Chester ALS, mayor’s pprs. ZM/L/3/413; CSP Ire. 1666-69, p. 460.
  • 70 Bodl. Carte 220, ff. 286-7, 294-5, 300-3, 326-8; 48, f. 227.
  • 71 Bodl. Carte 220, ff. 312-13, 318-19, 340-2.
  • 72 CTB 1667-8, p. 232, 236, 258.
  • 73 CSP Ire. 1666-9, pp.572-3.
  • 74 CSP Ire. 1666-9, p. 603; CSP Dom. 1667-8, p. 366.
  • 75 Bodl. Carte 220, ff. 406-407.
  • 76 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 439-40.
  • 77 Bodl. Carte 48, f. 311; 220, ff. 435-436.
  • 78 Bodl. Carte 48, f. 327; 51, f. 433; 220, ff. 445-6; 50, ff. 18-19.
  • 79 Bodl. Carte 243, ff. 12-13; 50, ff. 42, 50.
  • 80 Mapperton, Sandwich mss, Jnl. x. 342.
  • 81 Bodl. Carte 243, ff. 24-26.
  • 82 CSP Ire. 1666-69, pp. 752-3.
  • 83 CSP Ire. 1669-70, pp. 3-4, 6-7; CSP Dom. 1668-9, p. 522.
  • 84 CTB 1669-72, p. 352-487 passim.
  • 85 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 444-5; CSP Ire. 1669-70, p. 161.
  • 86 Add. 28938, ff. 50-51; Carte, Life of Ormond, iv. 599.
  • 87 Bodl. Carte 46, f. 637.
  • 88 Beckett, Old Cavalier, 103-4.
  • 89 CSP Dom. 1671, p. 85.
  • 90 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 447.
  • 91 TNA, PRO 31/3/126 pp. 89, 90.
  • 92 Bodl. Carte 70, f. 423.
  • 93 Corresp. of Thomas Corie (Norf. Rec. Soc. xxvii), 36.
  • 94 Evelyn Diary, iii. 600.
  • 95 TNA, PRO 31/3/127, pp. 3, 16; Add. 28938, ff. 50-1.
  • 96 Add. 28938, ff. 50-51; CSP Dom. 1672, pp. 92-93; HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 449.
  • 97 CSP Ven. 1671-1672, p. 302.
  • 98 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 450-1.
  • 99 CSP Dom. 1672-3, pp. 333, 629; CTB iv. 30, v. 1042.
  • 100 Stowe 201, f. 395.
  • 101 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 452; Hatton Corresp. i. (Cam. Soc. n.s. xxii), 105-6.
  • 102 CSP Dom. 1673, p. 269.
  • 103 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 452-3.
  • 104 Williamson Letters i. (Cam. Soc. n.s. viii), 49-50.
  • 105 CSP Dom. 1673, pp. 327-414.
  • 106 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iii. 331; CSP Dom. 1673, pp. 494, 499.
  • 107 CSP Dom. 1673, p. 508; CSP Ven., 1673-1675, pp. 121-2, 127.
  • 108 Williamson Letters i. 25.
  • 109 Bodl. Carte 38, f. 52.
  • 110 CSP Ven., 1673-1675, p. 178.
  • 111 Williamson Letters ii. 125.
  • 112 Bodl. Carte 70, f. 423.
  • 113 TNA, PRO 31/3/130, ff. 107-110.
  • 114 Bodl. Carte 70, f. 423.
  • 115 Bodl. Carte 70, f. 450; 50, f. 143; 220, f. 464.
  • 116 Essex Pprs (Cam. Soc. ser. 2, xlvii), 262-3.
  • 117 Bodl. Carte 243, f. 163; 38, f. 177.
  • 118 Verney ms mic. M636/27, Sir Ralph to Edmund Verney, 16 Nov. 1674.
  • 119 Carte, Life of Ormond, iv. 495-8.
  • 120 Bodl. Carte 47, ff. 245-6; 220, ff. 478-480, 484.
  • 121 Bodl: Carte 243, ff. 192-3; Verney ms mic. 636/28, Sir Ralph to Edmund Verney, 1 Feb. 1674[-5]; CSP Dom. 1673-5, p. 561.
  • 122 Bodl: Carte 243, ff. 219-220; CSP Dom. 1673-5, p. 605.
  • 123 Bodl. Carte 50, f. 146.
  • 124 Verney ms mic. M636/28, William Fall to Sir Ralph Verney, 1 Apr. 1675.
  • 125 Salop Archs. Attingham mss 112/1/1; Add. 40860, f. 85.
  • 126 Verney ms mic. M636/28, Fall to Sir R. Verney, 8 Apr. 1675.
  • 127 Timberland, i. 183.
  • 128 CSP Dom. 1676-7, p. 7.
  • 129 HEHL, EL 8419.
  • 130 Evelyn Diary, iv. 94, 97.
  • 131 HMC 7th Rep. 494; CSP Dom. 1676-7, p. 420; The Dukes of Ormonde, 5.
  • 132 Longleat, Bath mss. Coventry pprs. 21, f. 254.
  • 133 CSP Dom. 1677-8, p. 136-7.
  • 134 Longleat, Bath mss. Coventry pprs. 84, f. 68; CSP Dom. 1677-8, p. 272; Verney ms mic. M636/30, John to Edmund Verney, 2 Aug. 1677.
  • 135 Longleat, Bath mss. Coventry pprs. 2, ff. 465-6, 475-6.
  • 136 Baxter, William III, 146-7; Verney ms mic. M636/30, J.to Sir R.
  • 137 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 53-54.
  • 138 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 57-59, 386.
  • 139 Verney ms mic. M636/31, J. to Sir R. Verney, 6 Dec. 1677; Bodl. Carte 79, ff. 146-7.
  • 140 Hatton Corresp. i. (Cam. Soc. n.s. xxii), 119-20; HMC Rutland, ii. 42.
  • 141 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 82-83.
  • 142 Bodl. Carte 146, ff. 51-52; HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 92-93.
  • 143 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 87-88.
  • 144 HMC Finch, ii. 41.
  • 145 Verney ms mic. M636/31, Sir Ralph to Edmund Verney, 14 Feb. 1677[-8].
  • 146 CSP Dom. 1677-8, pp. 645, 669.
  • 147 Longleat, Bath mss. Coventry pprs. 41, ff. 313-5.
  • 148 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 108-10.
  • 149 Eg. 3331, f. 5.
  • 150 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 149-50, 155.
  • 151 CSP Dom. 1678, pp. 282, 307, 352; Evelyn Diary, iv. 137.
  • 152 CSP Dom. 1678, p. 372; Longleat, Bath mss. Coventry pprs. 2, f. 272.
  • 153 Bodl. Tanner, 39, f.97.
  • 154 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 197-202.
  • 155 CSP Dom. 1678, pp. 421-2, 444.
  • 156 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 219-20.
  • 157 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 220-5.
  • 158 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 235, 243-4.
  • 159 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 255-6.
  • 160 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 277-8.
  • 161 Beinecke Lib. OSB mss 6, box 1, folder 3, Ormond to Danby, 13 Jan. 1678/9; HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 320.
  • 162 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 364-7.
  • 163 Cobbett, Parl. Hist. iv. 1116-18; Christie, Shaftesbury, ii. pp. xcix-cii.
  • 164 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 504-5; v. 1-2.
  • 165 LJ xiii. 478.
  • 166 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 3-5, 13-15, 34.
  • 167 Add. 28938, ff. 1-2; Carte, Life of Ormond, v. 135-6.
  • 168 HMC Ormonde, n.s. iv. 501-3.
  • 169 Bodl. Carte 141, f. 102; Carte 70, f. 423v; Carte, Life of Ormond, v.
  • 170 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 21-22.
  • 171 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 1-2, 23-24, 40; London Gazette, 7, 10 Apr. 1679.
  • 172 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 45-46, 53-54, 66.
  • 173 HMC Var. ii. 394; HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 54-55.
  • 174 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 70-71.
  • 175 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 79-80.
  • 176 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 120, 144-5.
  • 177 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 147-8, 150, 154, 175, 212-13.
  • 178 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 158.
  • 179 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 175-6, 190-1, 211-13.
  • 180 HMC 7th Rep. 476.
  • 181 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 229, 236.
  • 182 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 243-4.
  • 183 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 248-9; Bodl. Carte 70, f. 423; 228, f. 164.
  • 184 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 253, 262-3.
  • 185 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 263-4, 268, 271; Bodl. Carte 243, f. 450.
  • 186 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 294-5.
  • 187 Prideaux Letters (Cam. Soc. n.s. xv), 79-80.
  • 188 Bodl. Carte 39, f. 127.
  • 189 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 290-1.
  • 190 Add. 32680, f. 328.
  • 191 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 297-8.
  • 192 Bodl. Carte 243, f. 460.
  • 193 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 300-1.
  • 194 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 305.
  • 195 Bodl. Carte 243, f. 469; HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 308.
  • 196 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 319-20, 325.
  • 197 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 316-17.
  • 198 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 321, 325-6, 328, 331.
  • 199 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 332, 335-6.
  • 200 CSP Dom. 1679-80, p. 505; HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 332.
  • 201 Add. 75360, Hickman to Halifax, 24 June 1680; CSP Dom. 1679-80, p.
  • 202 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 339, 344, 346-7, 353-4; Evelyn Diary, iv. 208-1.
  • 203 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 359, 361; HMC 7th Rep. 740.
  • 204 HMC 7th Rep. 740; HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 361-2.
  • 205 Evelyn Diary, iv. 211.
  • 206 CSP Dom. 1679-80, p. 580.
  • 207 Hatton Corresp. i. (Cam. Soc. n.s. xxii), 233.
  • 208 Bodl. Carte 232, ff. 66-67; 128, f. 384v.
  • 209 Add. 28875, ff. 114-15; Registers of Westminster Abbey, ed. J.L. Chester, 199; HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 367.
  • 210 Westminster Abbey Reg. 200.
  • 211 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 359-61.
  • 212 HMC Ormonde, n.s. v. 387-8.
  • 213 Westminster Abbey Reg. 199n; CTB 1681-5, pp. 562, 846; CTB 1685-89, p. 1397; Bodl. Carte 216, f. 403; 169, ff. 53-54.
  • 214 Add. 28940, ff. 37-38.
  • 215 HJ, xlix. 687.