*This article
appeared in the Mizen Journal, no. 9 (2001): 81-96
A Family Divided: The O'Sullivan Beare Case
1587-1601
by Edward O’Mahony
In 1587, a land dispute was presented to Privy
Council in London, which provides a fascinating glimpse into 16th century Irish
life and customs. The dispute, between Sir Owen O'Sullivan Beare and his nephew
Donnell O'Sullivan, better known as the Irish hero, Donnell Cam O'Sullivan
Beare, revolved around the lordship of Beare and Bantry in West Cork. At the
root of the conflict lay both the English policy of surrender and regrant, which
disenfranchised entire clans, and the Irish tradition of tanistry, which often
led to disputes over succession. By the time it had reached the Privy Council,
the dispute was already decades old, and it was to continue in various forms
until 1601, leaving behind it a legacy of bitterness and betrayal.
The origins of the dispute can be traced
back to 1565. In that year, Dermod O'Sullivan Beare, the father of the
complainant, died and was succeeded by Owen O'Sullivan, his brother, under the
Irish system of tanistry. Tanistry was the Irish form of succession, and unlike
the English system of primogeniture, whereby the eldest son inherited all the
land and power from his father, the Irish practice was to pass power, at least
in theory, to the fittest adult relation in the chief's family. This could be a
brother, son, uncle, or nephew, the only restriction being that the claimant
had to share a common ancestry with the previous chieftain that could be traced
back at least three generations. In practice this system often resulted in clan
rivalries between claimants, with assassinations and raiding of rival's lands a
common occurrence.
O'Sullivan Beare's son, also called
Donnell, had only just been born at the time of Owen's election as chieftain,
and he and his mother were forced to seek refuge in her own country. Shortly
after becoming the new O'Sullivan Beare in 1565, Owen left with his forces to
join the Earl of Desmond in his fight
with the Earl of Ormond. Following the disastrous battle of Affane, Desmond and
his main supporters, including Owen O'Sullivan Beare, were ordered to appear
before the court in London.
In an effort to break some of the power of
the Earl of Desmond, McCarthy Mor and O'Sullivan Beare were both forced to
submit their lands to the Crown. On July 24, 1565, the lands of Beare and
Bantry were re-granted to the newly knighted Sir Owen O'Sullivan Beare. In
his application for the grant, Sir Owen had specifically asked for, and appears
to have been granted, the "lands of Beare and Bantry, including, with the
towns and castles of Downebwy, the town and principal castle of Beare Haven,
Ardee , &c., lands extending 42 miles in length and 24 in breadth."
(1) In a sign of things to come, McCarthy Mor, the new Earl of Clancarr,
asked the Queen that the services due him by Sir Owen should be fully
expressed, and not passed over in general words. Even at this early
date, Sir Owen does not appear to have been fully trusted by anyone.
During the Desmond rebellions (1579-1573 and
1579-1583), Sir Owen appears to have played both sides, and in 1572 was briefly
imprisoned by the English authorities. According to Donnell O'Sullivan:
"..when the said Sir Owen was committed to the castle of Limerick….I was
about 17 years of age, and having determined then to make suit against the said
Sir Owen, my mother with others of her friends repaired to Limerick, where the
said Sir Owen understanding of her coming, procured license of conference with
her, which being granted, the said Sir Owen made her believe that he did not
mean to deal hardly with me, and that if I were to follow his counsel, he would
commit the charge of the country, with his wife and children unto my
hands."(2)
The legal dispute between the two
O'Sullivans can be traced to this moment. As Donnell O'Sullivan later wrote:
".. thus, my mother being simple and unwise, and myself young, as
aforesaid, and without discretion, light to be carried away with any advice,
have agreed to take the said Sir Owen as my natural father, he to take me as
his son and heir; whereupon he committed the charge of the country unto me,
willing me always to favour his wife, and use his followers well…At which time
I went into the country,..and the company that tended upon me were the said Sir
Owen's followers and servants, who by his direction assisted me."(3)
On Sir Owen's release from Limerick castle, he
obviously had second thoughts about the arrangement, since according to Donnell
O'Sullivan:"..the said Sir Owen within one quarter of a year after, repenting himself, in letting
me to have any footing in the country, wrongfully and most injuriously banished
me and my followers from thence.."(4) Being still under age at that point,
Donnell O'Sullivan had to wait until he reached the age of 21 before he could
take the matter any further.
In 1586, Donnell O'Sullivan took his case
to the Council of Ireland. According to his later testimony, Sir Owen
supposedly: "..offered to let me have a castle
and four and twenty plough lands during his life, and after his decease, I to
have the one half of the country. Mr. Chief Justice [Gardener] was present,
with the Lord Chancellor and others of the Council there, when this offer was
by him made; yet I, finding my cause plain and just, never thought to accept
thereof."(5)
Donnell O'Sullivan appears to have had some
luck with the council, but the following year he was forced to take his case to
the Privy Council in London. On May 5,
1587, Sir Henry Wallop, the Vice Treasurer of Ireland and, as a Lord Justice,
the man responsible for sorting out the numerous property claims arising from
the Desmond wars, wrote to Lord Burghley, Elizabeth I's Lord Treasurer in
London, that Donnell O'Sullivan was travelling to London to fight his uncle's
claim to all of Beare and Bantry in West Cork. Sir Owen had gone to England to
press his claim, and fearing that he might succeed, Donnell was forced to
follow him to the Privy Council despite severe financial difficulties.
Burghley appears to have taken a great
interest in this particular case, far more so than any other similar case of
the period. As Lord Treasurer, Burghley was extremely interested in any new
source of income, and it would appear that his interest was sparked by the
possibility of the Crown being able to seize part of the disputed land and with
it the rich fishing grounds off the south-west coast.
On May 10, 1587, Geoffrey Fenton, secretary to
the Lord Deputy in Dublin, also informed Burghley that that Donnell O'Sullivan
had been granted a license by the Lord Deputy to travel to London in pursuance
of his claim. Fenton was somewhat acquainted with the territory in dispute. In
October 1586, he had travelled as far as Cape Clear on a mission to determine
the state of defences of the various harbours in Munster, and in his letter to
Burghley he recommended that the land in dispute should be partitioned between
the two claimants by specially appointed commissioners. Fenton went on to
suggest how the government might gain from this dispute: "And then after
they be both settled in the possession of their parts, to make several
resignations thereto to Her Majesty, and resume them again with English
tenures, and such other conditions as the State here shall think
convenient."(6) This policy of surrender and regrant would not only bring
the two claimants under the auspices of English law, but more importantly,
would enhance English control over the area since: "..in those Irish
remote parts, where several competitors stand for one country, there is no way
better to keep the balance even than to apportion the lands into parts, and so
to make one of them to 'counterpeyse' another."(7)
On the same day, May 10, 1587, Donnell
O'Sullivan wrote a letter to the Privy Council, replying to what he termed
"the false accusations and surmises of Sir Owen O'Sullivan."(8)
Specifically, Donnell claimed that: "..the surrender was made [by Sir
Owen] in no effectual form of law, and by one that was no way lawfully intitled
to surrender.."(9) He goes on to promise that if he " were in
possession of the premises [he] would surrender to Her Majesty, and take the
same back again by Her Highness's letters patents.. and will perform so much,
God willing, whensoever your honours will award me the possession which I may
better do than the said Sir Owen, who hath no right but a wrongful
possession."(10)
Donnell then discussed the practice of
succession among the O'Sullivans, which appears to have been a strange
amalgamation of tanistry and English common law, whereby tanistry was used when
heirs were too young to succeed by primogeniture: "And where my adversary
setteth down for reasons to avoid the course of common law touching descents
from father to the son that the said lands is barbarous and uncivil, and the
people unacquainted with civil government till his time, and that the other
lands adjoining to his country did always follow the said Irish custom; for
answer thereunto, I say that the country was not so barbarous, but that the
heirs thereof were always brought up in learning and civility, and could speak
the English and Latin tongues; but to excuse his own ignorance and want of
bringing up, being not able to speak the English language, he would gladly
discredit the country and all his ancestors, who were ever better disposed
people, to good government, learning
and civility, than the said Sir Owen, as hereunder written shall appear. And as
for the countries adjoining I say that M'Carthy More's lands, who is the
chiefest of all the Irishry in Munster, Musgrie [Muskerry], and O'Sullivan
More's lands, which both are next unto the lands in demand, went always by
descent from the father to the son; for proof whereof I can manifest in
particular where the uncles, being eldest, were put from the lordship in theses
three great several countries, and the nephew, being younger, preferred to the
same…
[Sir Owen has been unable to prove]…that
any of the said uncles mentioned by him, or nay other uncle, after the death of
any of their eldest brethren did enjoy the lands and manors in Beare and Bantry
(especially the manor of Dunboy) being the principal and chief house which
O"Sullivan Beare ought to have enjoyed, but that always immediately after
the death of the said eldest brethren, their sons and heirs by course of common
law, always entered into the said manor of Downboy and the rest of the said
country, and being so seized as lords of the said country by the name of
O'Sullivan Beare, died seized of the premises. And that which is a principal
note to fortify my title if it were well concieved, is this, that it cannot be
proved nor was alleged that any of my lineal ancestors was ever tanist, or
enjoyed that supposed part of the country, which Sir [Owen] untruly affirmed
that the uncles had as tanisties; whereas if there were any such custom in use
in the said country, some of my lineal ancestors should have been tanist,
according to the Irish custom, which matter being well considered is sufficient
to determine of all this controversy.,,"(11)
To counteract stories spread by his uncle
about his own activities in the second Desmond rebellion, Donnell then proceeded to inform the Privy Council:"..what
manner of man [Sir Owen] hath been, and how he behaved himself in all dangerous
times of rebellion in Ireland…
[During the First Desmond
Rebellion]..he joined again with the said archtraitor James Fitz Maurice, to
rebel against the Queen and her subjects, and so came in company with him to
sack and burn the town of Kilkenny, but being prevented therein he spared not
to do all the traitorous acts that he could devise, whereupon he was proclaimed
traitor, the particulars of whose treasons were long to be rehearsed. Only this
I will declare unto your honours that Sir John Perrot, being then lord
president of Munster, encamping himself about Castlemaine, the only strong house
which the said James Fitz Maurice kept, gave commandment to all the nobility
and gentlemen of the province to repair thither with all their forces furnished
with victuals. Among whom the said Sir Owen, feigning himself a subject, came
thither with the rest, and during their continuance in the said siege he had
always conference with such traitors as warded the said castle; and using this
it chanced one time that he went to the castle, carrying with him certain
victuals and munition for the ward by night. Some had intelligence thereof, and
told it to the lord president. Whereupon the next morning he sent certain of
his men to bring the said Sir Owen before him, whose conscience bewraying
himself suddenly leaped on horseback and made an escape; so as he was
proclaimed, his goods confiscated, and the country taken to the Queen's hands,
so as he continued in rebellion until within a year after, the Lord Barrie,
being his father-in-law, procured his pardon, and got him the possession of those lands, and so continued until the said
James Fitz Maurice, being banished over seas, returned again into the west
coasts of Ireland, who, upon his coming, sent word to the said Sir Owen, and
desired him to take to his custody certain jewels and apparels of his; whereupon
the said Sir Owen presently sent a boat of his with divers of his trustiest men
to the borders of Dingle Cush, where the said James was, who sent by them the
value of five or six hundred pounds to be kept, among which was a gilt armour
of the said James's, which armour, after the death of James, Sir Owen's wife
bestowed upon Captain Apsley, and used the rest at her pleasure.
After the proclaiming of the
Desmond and his confederators, this Sir Owen sent word to Sir James of Desmond,
younger brother to the Earl, and entreated him to come to O'Mahon Fynn's
country, under M'Carthy Reagh, adjoining unto the lands in demand, and then to
burn and spoil the said country, being inhabited by Her Majesty's subjects, and
if there were any danger towards him that he would be near to rescue him, the
which the said James did, and coming to and fro through the said Sir Owen's
dwelling, the said Sir Owen was always near, ready to have holpen him if any
danger were imminent, and the said Sir Owen being in private communication with
him received part of the spoils, which the said James took from Her Majesty's
subjects; for proof whereof there are gentlemen in Ireland that were then in
the company of the said James, when the said Sir Owen was in talk with the said
traitor as aforesaid, which they would depose if they were examined.
Not long after this the Lord
Justice and the states of Ireland, mistrusting the said Sir Owen to prevent his
ill disposition, took out of his hands the castle of Dunboy, which standeth
upon Beare Haven, and committed himself to the castle of Limerick, where he
remained until the wars were near at an end, a little before the Earl of
Desmond's death, and being then discharged out of prison, the said Desmond
being so weakened as he could scarce find any place to hide himself, with two
or three men, during the government time of the Earl of Ormond in Munster.
There was a galloglass, named Geffrye M'Sweeeny, that secretly maintained and
relieved the late Earl of Desmond, being notwithstanding protected upon the
borders of Sir Owen's dwelling, which being told to the governor, his honour
made as earnest search for the said Desmond as he might; but yet the said
galloglass conveyed the said Desmond away, and having no other refuge, relying
very much to the said Sir Owen being a fosterer to his eldest son, repaired
unto his house, where he was welcome and entertained by the said Sir Owen,
myself being then present. At which time, the said galloglass prayed Sir Owen
to receive into his custody three score stud mares, the Earl of Desmond's shirt
of mail, and other jewels, which the said Sir Owen did, and having kept the
said traitor a fortnight in his house sent him safe away..."(12)
Whether Donnell O'Sullivan took part in
the last Desmond rebellion (1579-1583) is difficult to determine. He would only
have been 14 when the uprising began and 18 when it ended in November 1583.
Many years later, the historian Don Philip O'Sullivan Beare claimed that
Donnell did take part, while Owen O'Sullivan Beare, when placing his family and
land under the care of Donnell O'Sullivan, reportedly warned him to stay out of
the hands of the English garrison. In his statement to the Privy Council,
Donnell nevertheless denied being involved in the rebellion and claimed he
would be: "contented to lose my right [to the disputed territory] if ever
I kept company with the Desmonds in their rebellion."(13) It is probable
that he was involved, though for obvious reasons he did not want to divulge
this, and he appears to have been accused of taking part by Sir Owen or one of his henchmen.
Subsequently, Donnell was examined before Sir Francis Walsingham, where he was
able to discharge himself, though in a revealing phrase Donnell wrote
that:" Her Majesty's pleasure was that all should be forgiven and
forgotten."(14)
On
June 6, 1587, a document was submitted to the government illustrating the title
of Sir Owen O'Sullivan to the possession of Beare and Bantry, together with a
pedigree showing descent according to the Irish custom of tanistry and
suggestions that it was not likely that one particular Irish country should
differ from all the rest in this regard. Two days later, Donnell O'Sullivan
responded by submitting his own pedigree and another document showing how the
seignory of O'Sullivan and the lands of Beare and Bantry always descended
lineally from the father to the son and heir.
That same day, June 8, 1587, a report was
submitted describing the ancient custom of division of lands among the
O'Sullivans of Beare and Bantry: "The proper inheritance of land belonging
to the O'Sullivans is 15 quarters, every quarter containing three plough lands.
The one half whereof was by ancient custom alloted to the O'Sullivan, lord of
the country for the time being. The other half to be divided and distributed
among the worthiest and best of the name, as cousins and kinsman to the lord.
as a portion to live upon, viz. to the tanist, the best part of the said one
half, which is two quarters, every quarter containing three ploughlands. To the
second eldest next the Tanist, which is Donnel O'Sullivan, the plaintiff, there
is allotted of the said one half six plough lands, and so the rest to be
divided among the other kinsmen. But it is to be understanded, that this order
was in some times altered, and so ought to be according the custom of the
country, that is according the diminution of increase of the said name of the
O'Sullivans; which alteration should be when the name should augment; then
everyone's portion were diminished to give living to the new comer; and if the
name were diminished then the portion of the deceased to be divided among the
outlivens. But the lord's portion, which is the first half did never alter, but
continue still to O'Sullivan for the time being. The lord hath also four quarters
of land belonging to his manor of Foyd, and this with half the 15 quarters
aforesaid, is all the land the lord has in his own possession, howbeit he is
chief lord of all the country. There are 20 quarters more in the country, which
is the lord's too, but they be allotted to other cousins and kinsmen as their
shares of old ancient custom to live upon, paying his rents to the lord, which
is but little worth now-a-days, as the issues descended of Fynyn Duff
O'Sullivan, the issues descended of the son of Lawrence O'Sullivan, the issues
descended of the son of Dwling O'Sullivan, the issues descended of the son of
McBwogg O'Sullivan, the issues descended of the son of Donnel O'Sullivan, the
issues descended of the son of Teig O'Sullivan, and such like, and every one of
them hath his share thereof, paying his rent to the lord for the time being,
and at the lord's pleasure he may take the land out of their hands if they had
not paid the rent, which in old time was the cessing of his men of war, as
galloglasses, kerne, horsemen, and such like, besides to pay all his charges
whensoever he would come out of his country to any town or city, to sessions,
term, service of his prince, and such like, &c.
There is also belonging to O'Sullivan two
principal castles as his chief manors, or dwelling, in Beare and Bantry. In
Beare the chief manor of Dunboye alias Bearhaven Castle, of which he
carrieth his name of O'Sullivan Beare. In Bantry, the manor of Foyd, and
another castle builded by Sir Owen's own father, called Carrig in Assyg; the
which three remaineth in the possession of the said Sir Owen. There is also a
fourth castle, called Ardea, which is the manor, or house allotted ever for the
Tanist for the time being, and is now in the possession of Philip O'Sullivan, tanist
and brother to Sir Owen; but there was never seen a castle allotted to any
other of the name.
The standing rent due to O'Sullivan out or
upon his country is but 40l, and that itself was ever allotted to the lady for
the time being towards her idle expenses, so as the country being no good farm
land, but all valleys, cragged rocks and hills, can yield no great commodity,
and therefore the O'Sullivan for the time being liveth only by the sea, and the
commodity thereof, as his fishing, his wrecks, and such like, &c. And for
the fishing it is a thing uncertain, for some years if fishing do fall upon the
coast, then Dunboye is worth much; if fishing fail, it cannot yield profit.
For the ships and boats, the rents of them
is but as the lord and they can agree, according as the fishing do continue all
the season of the year, or fail, as sometimes it doth fail within one month,
&c.
The reason wherefore there is no
reservation of rents upon those that hold the said land is, because they were
to pay everything that the lord lacked from time to time, as debts, building of
a house, or castle, or marrying his daughter, or to supply the wants of his
house, and such like, &c."(15)
On the same day, June 8, 1587, a series
of other documents were also put before the government. Donnell O'Sullivan
submitted petitions to the Lord Treasurer, Burghley, asking that Sir Owen be
prevented from detaining his lands, and more importantly, that his suit should
be either speedily determined or that he might be given possession of Dunboy. A
collection of depositions proving that Donnell O'Sullivan's ancestors had
seisin, that is ownership of Dunboy and the rest, was also presented. On Sir
Owen's side, an abstract of his proofs showing the succession of tanist and the
tanists's portion in Beare and Bantry, and a collection of the witnesses he had
produced to prove the possession of persons in the collateral line. In
addition, certain articles of agreement were set out for determination between
Sir Owen and Donnell O'Sullivan, and Florence McCarthy and Derby McOwen were
also ordered to set down what would be a sufficient maintenance for Donnell
O'Sullivan while a device to bring the land to inheritance through descent was
worked out.
Nothing more is heard for a year, until the
summer of 1588, by which time the political climate had changed considerably.
By the 30th of May, 1588, the Spanish armada was ready to sail to England. In
southwest Ireland, another potential threat was emerging with the marriage of
Florence McCarthy, the heir of McCarthy Reagh, to the daughter of McCarthy Mor.
This would unite the two great McCarthy clans under the leadership of a man
whom the English government were extremely suspicious of.
At the same time, Sir Owen McCarthy,
"thinking himself wronged by Florence McCarthy, who promised to marry his
daughter, and fearing some diminution of his own estate, by the suit of his
nephew Donnell O'Sullivan, and desirous to have a friend of a McCarthy, and so
to make his party good howsoever the world went,"(16) began to ally
himself with various disgruntled McCarthy factions. First he entered into
league with the illegitimate son of McCarthy Mor, Donnell McCarthy, who was
well respected among the McCarthys and who wanted to be McCarthy Mor himself.
This was followed by the marriage of Sir Owen's youngest daughter to the Knight
of Kerry's son and heir. Sir Owen's objective was described as: "hoping no
doubt that they two should draw unto them the evil disposed of Kerry, and
Desmond, and he joining with them his forces out of Beare, Bantry, and other
parts of the country of Cork, should be able when they saw their time, to do in
these parts what they thought good.."(17) The idea of stirring up the
country in order to get one's way was an old tactic used extensively, though
with varying degrees of success, by the Geraldines of Desmond and Kildare. The
idea was to either make a region so unstable that the government had to come to
terms with the protagonist, or the protagonist presented himself as the only
person who could control the situation. Either way, the protagonists often got
their way.
Nevertheless, the English government of the
1580s was much stronger than that of previous decades, and Sir Owen's tactics
appear to have backfired. The report recommended: "Sir Owen O'Sullivan's
commitment to ward [garrison troops on his land], till he put in good pledges
and assurances for his loyalty, the apprehension of the Earl of Clancarr's base
son, and the execution of him by justice or by martial law, for breaking Her
Majesty's prison and living ever since without pardon or protection, not
submitting himself to due authority, or the employment of him in some service
out of those parts; the giving of justice to the inhabitants of Desmond, that
neither by the Earl of Clancarthy's unlawful grants they be deprived of their
land, nor by the payment of his debts spoiled of their goods, so finding the
sweet of Her Majesty's government, they shall repose themselves thereon most
contentedly, and will not be drawn to any tumult, which the Earl doubtless in
favour of his base son would gladly urge them unto when time served, and
thereunto his dealing seem unto me to tend, directed by others that look beyond
the present. The taking of good sureties of the Knight of Kerry's son for his
good demeanour; the deciding of the controversies between Sir Owen O'Sullivan
and Donnell O'Sullivan by arbitrement, that the land may be divided and he so
weakened...."(18)
The arrest of Florence McCarthy,
together with his wife and major followers in late June 1588, as well as the
destruction of the Spanish armada in August, appears to have been a major shock
to Sir Owen. Nothing more is heard of him conspiring with other Irish leaders,
although he was still regarded with suspicion by the English government. On
October 18, 1589, a report thought to have been written by Geoffrey Fenton,
listed the names of suspected men in Ireland. The list included the names of
men suspected in Munster: "The White Knight, Donough McCormack, alias
McDonough, Patrick Fitzmaurice, Sir Owen O'Sullivan, of Bearhaven, Lord
Barry."(19)
On November 29, 1589, Donnell O'Sullivan
wrote to Burghley, apparently from London, asking that Burghley look at his
petition and complaining at the length of time his suit was taking as well as
his inability to bear any further expenses. Finally, on December 15, 1589, the
O'Sullivan case again came up for consideration. On January 20, 1590, the Privy
Council sent word to the Vice-President of Munster, Thomas Norreys, that Sir
Owen O'Sullivan was to pay 30l. [pounds] to his nephew Donnell
O'Sullivan and that Sir Owen was also ordered to appear before the Privy
Council by the 1st of May. On March 25, 1591, the state of the
controversy between Donnell O'Sullivan and Sir Owen O'Sullivan was
presented by the senior government law officers. On April 11, 1591, Burghley
was informed of the state of O'Sullivan's country and the names of people who
could provide information on it-including Florence McCarthy and James Miagh. On
April 25, Donnell O'Sullivan petitioned the Privy Council "..against the
book which his uncle Sir Owen O'Sullivan has framed to make him odious." This
was followed five days later by a somewhat desperate petition to Burghley, in
which Donnell O'Sullivan offered to surrender the lands in dispute to the Crown
on terms that would be "..more advantageous to Her Majesty than the offer
of his uncle."(20) On June 17 a report was presented to the government
providing details: "..of the lands and castles belonging to the
O'Sullivans of Beare, situate in the countries commonly called by the names of
Beare and Bantry."(21) On June 23, 1590, the Lord Deputy wrote to Burghley
from Dublin Castle informing him of his approval of a partition between Sir
Owen O'Sullivan Beare and Donnell O'Sullivan. The government, however, took its
time in making a decision. A year later, on July 27, 1591,
Attorney-General Sir John Popham and Solicitor-General Thomas Egerton informed
the Privy Council of their views on the O'Sullivan legal case. A year after that, on May 31, 1592,
Queen Elizabeth I ordered the commissioners, who were inquiring into the state
of the tenants and occupiers of the escheated lands of Munster, to deal with
the O'Sullivan case. With no end in sight to the case, Sir Owen
O'Sullivan petitioned Burghley in June 1592, to have the suit of his nephew
dismissed. On November 21. 1592, he again had Burghley petitioned, this
time by Sir Warham St. Leger, who recommended Sir Owen's suit on the basis that
Sir Owen had "..made very good proof of his loyal service since I have
known this province."(22)
On November 19, 1592, Burghley wrote to
Chief Justice Sir Robert Gardiner and Mr. Solicitor Roger Wilbraham, who had
been investigating the O'Sullivan case in West Cork, and thanked them for their
efforts. He did, however, criticize the fact that their depositions:
"..hold in many points contradictions, wherein you have spared to show
your opinions, what you think were fit for justice to be done betwixt the two
competitors, or what were expedient for the state of the country, for that I
did before I received your certificate with a kind of a plot [map] thereof,
think there might have been a division made tripartite, the castle of Beare for
the lord, with some competent ground about it, and the rest to have been
divided betwixt the two O'Sullivans. But I see though the country be somewhat
large, yet which ought to appertain to the captains is very little saving for
Irish manner of ruling. And for the castle, I perceive by your writing the same
serves to no purpose for the Crown. And if there be any other third device, I
think it were not much amiss that the young man might be made heir in
succession after Sir Owen's death, with assurance thereof from Her Majesty and
against O'Sullivan. And in the meantime the nephew to have something to be
relieved withal out of the seignory. And because both parties are like to call
for some end of this matter I wish, if it were possible, I might receive some
instructions from you of your opinions aforehand…"(23)
On December 31, 1592, Gardiner and Wilbraham,
gave their reply ot Burghley:"… Lastly, touching the controversy of the
O'Sullivans, we think there will be harboured amongst them, and their
dependants many cankered stomachs that will maintain strife to both their
harms, and the danger of the weaker party during their lives. Therefore we
think if the younger man, Donnell, could rest satisfied with an annuity of 40l.
per annum during his uncle's life out of the country, and live abroad, as
we moved unto him, before his departure hence, that would best continue the
peace in that remote and barbarous country. And after Sir Owen's death, being
now possessioner, we think it convenient for the lands to be divided, viz., the
Castle of Bearhaven, with the fishings, and three or four ploughlands near
adjoining to remain to Donnell and his heirs male of his body. To which part
(as we remember) he has proved by witness a possession in him, and his
ancestors in lineal descent. And Whydie Island and all the rest of the country
of O'Sullivan's (being more remote from Bearhaven) to remain to the eldest son
and heir of Sir Owen and his heirs male of his body. And Sir Owen, to surrender
his former patents, accepting new letters patents during his life, with several
remainders of the said several parcels, and there must be a proviso in the
patent that upon all occasions of service Her Majesty may resume into her hands
the Castle of Bearhaven and put a ward therein for the defence of those parts,
not diminishing any profits of the fishing or lands."(24)
On April 11, 1593, The Lord Chief Justice of
England Sir John Popham, Sir Thomas Norreys, Mr Attorney-General of England,
Sir Thomas Egerton, and Mr Solicitor of Ireland, Roger Wilbraham informed the
Privy Council of their views on the case: "May it please your Lordships
according to your letters of the 12th of March last we have perused the
depositions lately taken in Ireland concerning the controversy between Donnell
O'Sullivan and Sir Owen, his uncle, calling both parties before us to inform us
more fully of the state of their several titles. And if the title stood only
between them two without title in Her Majesty, yet we find upon advised
examination of the witnesses, produced on either part, that the proofs are so
doubtful as we cannot discern which of them two hath better right to the lands
in controversy, whereupon we moved them if it should stand with Her Majesty
good pleasure, that they would be content to submit themselves to such division
of the lands as Her Majesty and your Lordships should best like of, and to
accept the same froom Her Majesty by several letters patent, declaring unto
them our opinion that Her Majesty (notwithstanding the letters patents lately
granted to Sir Owen upon an untrue suggestion of his former title, and
notwithstanding any other thing otherwise showed by themselves) yet hath Her
Highness' best right to all the territories of Beare and Bantry by an ancient
title of record, before any the O'Sullivan's were interested in the same.
Whereupon they do now humbly submit their titles and claims to Her Majesty's
gracious pleasure, and conform themselves to such directions therein, as shall
seem meet to your Lordships...And for the division, if it may so seem good, the
one may be placed at Beare Haven and the other at Bantry."(25)
Sir Owen appears to have been scheming again,
however, since the law officers now dealt with the case of Sir Owen's brother,
Philip, who was described as "a dangerous man." Philip O'Sullivan was
claiming to be the tanist to Sir Owen and was demanding that he be granted the
area around Ardea. It is likely that this demand was instigated by Sir Owen in
order to keep more of the territory in his immediate family. Nevertheless,
the law officers recommended that Philip O'Sullivan be given Ardea, since as
they put it: "being left unprovided of living we fear he may prove a
dangerous man, as he hath been heretofore."(26)
On June 10, 1593, the Privy Council wrote
to Burghley: "Touching a certain point in the letter to the Lord Deputy
for deciding the controversy between Sir Owen O'Sullivan and his nephew. This
certain point is a clause in a letter they have written to the Lord Deputy
which Sir Owen O'Sullivan mislikes, and as they are not willing to alter any
part of the letter without Burghley's privity and allowance, considering the
great pains he has taken in the matter, they have thought good to send the
letter back to Burghley, praying him to consider of that point, and if for any
good respect Burghley should not think fit to alter the same, then they will
give answer to Sir Owen accordingly, and he to be sent away with it as it is.
The clause is that the Lord Deputy shall advise them on both sides not to enter
into the possession of any part of the country of Beare by colour of their
title until the commission shall be delivered, and the commissioners entered
into the country of Beare."(27)
Sir Owen had by now decided to use legal
tactics to delay a decision on the matter, as well as expressions of
loyalty. On June 24, 1593, Owen
O'Sullivan (son of Sir Owen O'Sullivan Beare) wrote to Sir Thomas Norreys, the
president of Munster, and informed him that a fleet of 80 ships was spotted off
the land's end of Dursey Island. The importance of this information was
immediately realized since on July 2, 1593, the Lord Deputy of Ireland sent the
latter to the Privy Council: "..as a matter of very great importance in
our opinion and worthy of serious consideration, the rather for that it may be
supposed that this great fleet hath taken its course to Scotland, as hath been
formally gathered by other advertisements and certified to your Lordships,
which if it be so, it is probable in all reason and likelihood that there is a
dangerous attempt intended by them against this realm, and for our parts we
cannot but fear the worst,..."(28)
A few days later, Owen O'Sullivan, son of Sir
Owen O'Sullivan, petitioned Lord Burghley, asking that the controversy between
Sir Owen O'Sullivan and Donnell O'Sullivan be referred to the commons law. On
October 18, 1593, it was reported that Owen O'Sulllivan had brought the head of
one of Donnell McCarthy's followers to Sir Thomas Norreys. Although the
English government undoubtedly appreciated the actions of Owen O'Sullivan, it
doesn't appear to have affected their decision. On February 7, 1594, Wilbraham informed
Burghley that the partition between the O'Sullivans was finished, with Donnell
O'Sullivan receiving all the lands in Beare and Sir Owen O'Sullivan receiving
everthing in Bantry.
Almost immediately, Sir Owen was trying to
welsh on his obligations under the agreement. On February 26, 1594, it was
reported that Sir Owen O'Sullivan had broken his day of payment. It is
unclear how much he was to pay, although it was probably the sum of 40l. mentioned
above, which Donnell O'Sullivan was to receive for life out of the seignory. On
March 6, 1594, the Lord Deputy and Council of Ireland informed the Privy
Council that Sir Owen O'Sullivan had left for England to protest the way the
division of his territory had been made. Donnell O'Sullivan, who had been forced
to live in Dublin since the case began, was also unhappy with the division
claiming that the commissioners had made an unequal division:"..differing
greatly from the meaning of the said Lords [of the Privy Council], and of the
said Lord Deputy, and Council." On April 10, 1594 asking: "..that
letters may be sent from the Privy Council to the Lord Deputy and Council [of
Ireland] for putting him in present
possession of his allotments, all delays set apart."(29) On April
12, 1594, Sir Richard Bingham and Sir Robert Gardener informed Burghley that
the division of O'Sullivan's lands had been sent.
This decision appears to have placed Donnell O'Sullivan in possession of his
land, but it did not satisfy him very much. On December 12, 1594,
Donnell O'Sullivan wrote to Burghley, again from Dublin, complaining about the:
"Imperfection of the division set down between his uncle Sir Owen
O'Sullivan and the writer by the Vice-President of Munster and Justice Gould in
June 1593." (30) Two months later, Donnell O"Sullivan again went to
court over the disputed land. On September 8, 1595, Donnell O'Sullivan
again wrote to Burghley from Dublin asking that he: "..be a mean to the
Privy Council to write in explanation of their letters of 1593, June 5, that he
should have the haven which lieth close under his castle and was always
possessed by his ancestors." (31) This haven was of particular importance
to Donnell O'Sullivan, since his only real source of income came from charging
fishermen for the use of the harbour.
Nothing more is heard of his request, however, presumably because the
government's attention was by then devoted to combating the threat posed by
Hugh O'Neill. It wasn't until Sir Owen's death, probably in 1600, that Donnell
O'Sullivan and Sir Owen's heirs were able to reach an agreement using an
arbitrator that appears to have satisfied both sides.
Thus ended one of the longest-lasting legal
battles of the 16th century in Ireland. Following his father's death, Owen
O'Sullivan continued to remain loyal to the government, providing information
on a number of occasions, including the arrival of Spanish forces at
Castlehaven in December 1601. Nothing is heard of Donnell O'Sullivan until May
2, 1601, by which time O'Neill and his forces had been forced back into Ulster.
On that day, he wrote to the new president of Munster, Sir George Carew:
"The times being now reduced to some quiet (the Almighty be praised),..[he
had] leisure to consider his particulars, and craves Sir George's assistance
therein. After the decease of his father, who was possessed of the Lordships of
Bear and Bantry (the writer then being but two years old), his uncle, Sir Owen
O'Sullivan, entered into his inheritance, pretending the custom of tanist, and
endeavoured quite to disinherit him..............As the writer's life is
uncertain, he prays, for the sake of his heirs, that Sir George would recommend
his cause to the Queen, that the writer might be warranted to surrender what he
now quietly possesses, and obtain letters patent granting the same to him and
his heirs, and that the pretended
tanist custom may be quite abolished and extinguished. -Murronmoe, 1601, May
2." (32)
It is unknown whether Carew responded to
Donnell O'Sullivan's letter, but by the autumn the issue had become academic.
On September 21, 1601, Spanish forces under Don Juan del Aguila landed at
Kinsale. Donnell O'Sullivan, or O'Sullivan Beare, as he had been calling
himself since the death of Sir Owen, immediately offered his support and that
of his men to the Spaniards. He took part in the disastrous battle of Kinsale
and continued to fight long after all the other Irish leaders had given up.
************************************************************************
FOOTNOTES:
1. CSP
1509-1573; p. 265
2. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 347
3. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 347
4. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 343
5. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 343
6. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 341
7. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 342
8. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 342
9. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 342
10. CSP
1586-1588, July; p. 342
11. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 343
12. CSP 1586-1588, July; pp. 345-347
13. CSP
1586-1588, July; p. 347
14. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 347
15. CSP 1586-1588, July; pp. 363-365
16. CSP 1586-1588, July; p. 543
17. CSP
1586-1588, July; p. 543
18. CSP 1586-1588, July; pp. 542-543
19. CSP 1588, August-1592, September; p. 250
20. CSP 1588, August-1592, September; p. 391
21. CSP 1588, August-1592, September; p. 398
22. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 29
23. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; pp. 47-48
24. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 54
25. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 89
26. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p, 89
27. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 107
28. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 120
29. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 231
30. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 286
31. CSP 1592, October-1596, June; p. 384
32. CSP 1 November, 1600-31 July, 1601; pp. 309-310
33. See for example CSP 1588, August-1592, September; p. 304
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Primary
Sources:
1.
Calendar of the State Papers relating to Ireland of the reign of Henry VIII.,
Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth 1509-1573; ed. Hans Claude Hamilton (London,
1860)
2.
Calendar of State Papers of the reign of Elizabeth 1586-1588, July; ed. Hans
Claude Hamilton (London, 1877)
3.
Calendar of the State Papers relating to Ireland of the reign of Elizabeth,
1588, August-1592, September; ed. Hans Claude Hamilton (London, 1885)
4.
Calendar of the State Papers relating to Ireland, of the reign of Elizabeth,
1592, October-1596, June; ed. Hans Claude Hamilton (London, 1890)
5.
Calendar of the State Papers relating to Ireland, of the reign of
Elizabeth, 1 November, 1600-31 July,
1601; ed. Ernest George Atkinson (London, 1905)
Secondary
Sources:
1.
Berleth, Richard; The Twilight Lords (London, 1979)
2.
O'Sullivan Beare, Don Philip (translated by Mathew J. Byrne); Ireland under
Elizabeth: Chapters towards A History of Ireland in the Reign of Elizabeth
(London, 1970)