WALTER BUTLER JUNIOR (1674-1725) of MUNPHIN, COUNTY WEXFORD, IRELAND

Although Walter Butler Senior of Munphin (c.1642-1717) became stepfather to the children of his wife Eleanor, the widow of Edward 2^nd Viscount Galmoy, (viz. Pierce 3^rd Viscount Galmoy born 1652, Richard born 1659 and Margaret), Walter and Eleanor’s only child, their son and heir Walter Butler (Junior), was born in c.1674. This was the son that Colonel Walter Butler (Senior) reportedly sent for after the defeat of James II at the Battle of the Boyne, and sent to France with the King in July 1690:

The London Gazette, Monday July 14, 1690 (quoted by Wexford historian Herbert Hore):-

“The town of Wexford has declared for H.M. (William III) and the manner was thus, Colonel Butler, Lord Lieut. of the whole County, hearing that the late King James was gone by on Wednesday last, he posted after him, and from Duncannon wrote for his (Colonel Butler’s) son to come to him and to follow the late King into France; he wrote also another letter to Captain Kelly to come away with his Company; but this letter falling into the hands of an English merchant where Colonel Butler was quartered, he did not deliver it, but told the Captain how he was sent for, concealing that part of the letter about burning the Castle; and so soon as he and his Company were gone, the Protestants there rose, disarmed the Papists, and seized the Castle, and at their humble request H.M. is sending some force to secure them.”

“Brigadier d’Eppingher was sent from Castledermot with a thousand horse to the support of the Protestants and found on arrival the town abandoned with a good store of arms and provisions in it ."

(Hore: note 1-Gazette July 24^th “Col. Eppingher has taken possession of Wexford, and from thence marches to Duncannon.”)

For Colonel Walter Butler Senior to ‘have sent for his son’ to follow the King to France, implies that Walter Junior was indeed in active service somewhere in Ireland during the ‘troubles’. He may have returned to Wexford with one of his brothers to help his king regain his throne. Although Walter was only 14/15 years of age at the time, many youths fought in battle at that time.

King James’s illegitimate son (by Arabella Churchill sister of the Duke of Marlborough), James fitzJames the Duke of Berwick, was born in 1671, and in 1686, aged 15, he distinguished himself at the siege of Buda, under the command of Francis Taaffe (the future Earl of Carlingford). He led his father’s forces, as Colonel and Commander in Chief, in Ireland and at the Battle of the Boyne aged 18-19yrs. His brother Henry FitzJames b. 1673, was appointed Colonel of his Regiment at age 16yrs. They had escaped imprisonment with their father fleeing to France, arriving on Christmas Day 1688, seeking asylum from the French King Louis XIV. From France, James and his sons organized James’s expedition to Ireland, which no doubt included meeting with his commanders, in particular Earl Tyrconnell who was appointed Marshall of Ireland and Commander-in-Chief of James’s army, etc. Supporters in Ireland such as Galmoy and Patrick Sarsfield raised troops for their respective regiments. (Notably, Berwick married Patrick Sarsfield’s widow in 1695, and Piers married Berwick’s widowed sister and illegitimate daughter of James II, Henrietta fitzJames Lady Waldergrave, that same year.)

King James set up his court at the old palace of St Germain-en-Laye, in 1690 after fleeing Ireland.

At the time, young Walter was only 15 years of age, and was probably sent to his sister-in-law Ann Lady Galmoy in Paris who had left Ireland in May 1688 due to her poor health. By 1691 he may have been in the charge of his half-brother Richard Butler who was captain of the king’s personal guard at Saint-Germain-en-Laye. Sometime after, Walter joined the Irish Brigade, fighting for France against Britain and its allies, under the leadership of King James.

Walter (Junior) and his half-brothers Pierce Lord Galmoy and Richard were outlawed and attainted in 1691. To reverse these attainders, they were required to return and take the Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance before 29^th July 1697, neither doing so. As Walter was fighting for the French Army in which his half-brothers both held the rank of Colonel, and therefore did not return by the due date, his attainder remained in force.

WALTER BUTLER JNR'S MILITARY CAREER IN THE SERVICE OF FRANCE

It is possible that Walter was in the King’s or Queen’s Regiments of Horse, formed in 1692 on the re-arrangement in France of the Irish troops. The King’s and Queen’s Regiment of Horse were organised from nine cavalry regiments of the Irish army- Tyrconnell’s, Galmoy’s, Lucan’s, Sutherland’s, Luttrell’s, Abercorn’s (viz. Hamilton), Westmeath’s, Purcell’s and O’Brien’s/Clare’s- that came over from Ireland to France.

Of the 19,000 men and officers who left Ireland, those who were to act under King James’s commission , as his army, were to be divided into: 2 Troops of Horse Guards (under James fitzJames Duke of Berwick and Lord Lucan Patrick Sarsfield), 2 Regiments of Horse (King’s under Dominick Sheldon; Queen’s under Pierce Butler 3^rd Viscount Galmoy), 2 Regiments of Dragoons (à pier, or dismounted in order to serve as Infantry- King’s under Dominic Sarsfield 4^th Lord Viscount Kilmallock, & Queen’s under Oliver O’Gara), 8 Regiments of Foot (King’s under William Dorrington; Queen’s under Simon Luttrell; Infantry Regiment of the Marine under Lord Henry fitzJames Lord Grand Prior; Infantry Regiment of Limerick under John FitzGerald Bt; of Charlemont under Gordon O’Neill; of Dublin under John Power; of Athlone under Sir Maurice Eustace Bt., then in 1693 Walter Bourke esq.; of Clancarty under Roger Mac Elligot), and 3 smaller Independent Companies of Foot (under Sutherland, Browne and Hay). They were to be under the command of James II and of such General Officers as he should appoint. All the officers were to receive their commissions from him, and the troops were to be subject only to such rules and discipline of war, as he should appoint. [1]

French Cuirassier

Walter’s half brother, Lord Galmoy, was appointed Colonel of the 2^nd or Queen’s Regiment, which was engaged in 1692 on the coasts of Normandy for the proposed invasion of England, to restore the King (viz. James II)[2]. Galmoy also served at the siege of Roses in 1693- a Spanish port on the Bay of Roses near the Spanish/French border, captured by the French during the War of the Grand Alliance/Nine Years War, and occupied by the French until the Peace of Ryswick in 1697. Created Brigadier by brevet (in the service of France), April 28^th 1694, he was attached that year to the Army of Germany, to the Army of the Moselle, under the Marquis d’Harcourt in 1695; to the Army of Meuse, under the Marshal de Boufflers in 1696 (Boufflers negotiated the Treaty of Ryswick with William III in 1697); and again to the Army of Moselle, under the Marquis d’Harcourt in 1697. Whether, Walter served under his half-brother is unknown.

Galmoy’s horse regiment was broken up by the general reduction among the Irish forces in early 1698 due to the signing of the Treaty of Ryswick on 20 September 1697. The Treaty settled the Nine Years War which pitted France against the Grand Alliance of England, Spain, the Holy Roman Empire and the United Provinces. [3]As part of the Treaty, Louis XIV undertook to recognise William III as king of England and promised to give no further assistance to James II. Lands taken during the war were returned, including the Duchy of Lorraine to Leopold Joseph, son of Charles IV Duke of Lorraine. The two Irish Regiments, or King’s and Queen’s Regiments of Horse were formed into one, as that of Sheldon, Galmoy being compensated by orders, according to which the remains of the Infantry Regiment of Charlemont and the Queen’s Dismounted Dragoons were formed into a Regiment of Foot, as that of Galmoy, which was then employed with the Army of Italy in 1701. (In December 1702 Galmoy was made Maréchal de Camp or Major-General in the service of France by brevet, attached to the Army of Germany in 1703. Detained by sickness from taking the field in 1704, and not having been made a Lieut-General in France, he passed into Spain, where he obtained that grade from Philip V in March 1705, serving that campaign in Italy, and signalised himself at the battle of Calcinato; attached to the Army of the Rhine in 1708; to the Army of Dauphiné in 1709; and 1710-1712 to Army of Flanders, and finally Spain in 1713-14; after the general peace, the Regiment de Galmoy was dissolved and incorporated with that of Dillon. Returning from Spain to France in 1722, Lord Galmoy obtained the rank of Lieut-General.) [4]

Following the Treaty of Ryswick in September 1697, many of the Irish officers suddenly found themselves without a regiment, and the court at St Germain found itself flooded with stateless and unemployed soldiers. As Walter had returned, without licence, to England or Ireland at that time, it would indicate he was one of these.

The Book of Warrants for Licences 1697/8 to 1706 [5]:

Walter Butler + ( note- the + beside Walter’s name is not explained)

Warrant to Walter Butler who went into The French Kings Dominions Since the 11^th day of December 1688

Dated Kensington 24^th day of January 1697/8

(Followed by identically worded warrants for John Brady and Sr John Southcott)

Signed William R

Another warrant below Walter’s, for Francis Povy, also has an attached letter signed by Ja. Vernon:

Our Will &c. Privy Seal containing our Licence and Leave to Francis Povy Gent who went into the French Kings Dominions since the 11^th Day of December 1688 without Licence from __- or our late Royall Consort the Queen and has been in Arms under the French King since the 13^th February 1688 and is since returned into this our Kingdom without Lycence as aforesaid to stay in this our Realm of England or any other our Dominions and for ___ Kensington 24 January 1697 In the Ninth Year of Our Reign

By &c

Ja Vernon

The letter would seem to be applicable to all of those named on the page.

For each of the warrants, the date given for going into France was the “11^th December 1688”. This date had some significance- James attempted to flee to France on the 11th December, being captured that day by fishermen and returned to London on the 16th. On the way he had dropped the Great Seal in the Thames, as no lawful Parliament could be summoned without it. However, on that same day, the 11^th, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal formed a provisional government and decided to ask William to restore order. Consequently, this may be the ‘official’ date selected for all those who had gone to France prior to the change in regime, as opposed to those who took part in the rebellion and having refused to take the oath of allegiance, followed James II to France, thereby being attainted.

The warrant may also have been in response to the following Act of Parliament. Soon after the Assassination Plot against King William in 1696, an Act of Parliament was passed, “Against corresponding with the late King James and his Adherents, which Enacted, That all Persons who had been at St. Germains, should take out Warrants to prevent their being prosecuted for it by that Law”. An extensive “List of Persons who had been at St. Germains, or corresponded with King James in France in the Reign of King William” was published and included “Walter Butler”.

(John Oldmixon, The Secret History of Europe, Part IV, London, 1724, pp. 184-186, Eighteenth Century Collections Online, Gale, National Library of Australia, Accessed 4 Nov 2011)

Whatever the significance, the warrant indicates that Walter may have returned to England or Ireland in January 1698 without licence, which he was subsequently granted. However, Walter Junior’s attainder was still in effect as he had not returned and taken the Oath of Allegiance by July 1697 and it could only be reversed by an Act of Parliament, as indicated by the following statute:

Statute of the 9^th Will III Chap 5…; it was thereby enacted that all and every the convictions, outlawries, and attainders in this kingdom, of any person or persons whatsoever, for high treason or rebellion, not reversed or pardoned before the 29^th July 1697, should be and remain sufficient and effectual in the law for ever…:- In consequence of this statute, we submit whether anything short of an Act of Parliament can reverse the attainder thereby created.

(William Lynch Esq., A View of the Legal Institutions Honorary Hereditary Offices, and Feudal Baronies Established in Ireland During the Reign of Henry the Second, London, 1830, p.285)

The accompaniments to the report of the commission appointed in 1699 by the English parliament to inquire into the Irish forfeitures which contain the detailed particulars that formed the basis of the report, were not published, but copies of the accompaniments were submitted to the English houses of lords and commons.

After William's victory at the Boyne in 1690 further proceedings were taken in the Irish courts. Juries in a number of counties and cities returned bills of indictment for high treason in Ireland against more than two thousand individuals. Some of the indictments were followed by trial, but in the great majority of cases the persons concerned did not appear before the courts and were outlawed by default. After the war a series of prosecutions for high treason beyond the seas was instituted against more than a thousand individuals, most of whom had taken service in the French army and were outlawed by default.[6] Walter Butler Jnr of Munphin is listed on two of the lists:

1.A list of the severall persons who stand indicted and outlawed in the court of king's bench Ireland for high treason by them severally committed against their majesties King William and Queen Mary in the Kingdom of Ireland since their happy accession to the crown.

Co Wexford- Walter Butler jun, Mountsfin, esq. Pierce, Viscount Galway [Galmoy]

2.A list of the several persons who stand indicted and outlawed for high treason by them severally committed in parts beyond the seas against his majesty and her majesty since their accession to the crown.

Co Wexford- Walter Butler jun, Mountphin, gent, Edward Butler, do, gent.

(Notably, the ‘Edward Butler’ named, as ‘of Mountphin’, may have been Galmoy’s son)

(J.G. Simms, Irish Jacobites , Analecta Hibernica, No. 22 (1960), pp.52, 85, published by: The Irish Manuscripts Commission Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25511880 .Accessed: 24/04/2012 (source TCD Ms . MS N.1.3- report of the commission appointed in 1699 by the English parliament to inquire into the Irish forfeitures)

So despite his licence to return, Walter was subject to arrest for treason, and thus returned to the Continent.

John Cornelius O’Callaghan wrote of the consequences experienced by the Irish Brigades in France following the signing of the Treaty of Ryswick: [7]

The War of the League of Augsburg against Louis XIV was soon after terminated by the general Treaty of Peace with France, signed at Ryswick by Holland, Spain, and England in September, and by the German Emperor, and the Empire in October following.

Early in 1698, Louis XIV after such a long and burdensome war, was obliged to relieve France, by lessening, as much as possible, the vast and expensive military establishment he had maintained against the Allies; and since his acknowledgement, by the late Treaty, of William, as King of England, was incompatible with a continuation, in France, of the Irish forces, hitherto kept there as James II’s army, a great reform was ordered to be made among the Irish troops in general. The connexion with the special histories of the Irish regiments, need only be referred to here. But the disbanding of so many soldiers, as had belonged to the several broken corps, was productive of the very bad consequences, that might be expected from the long-accustomed avocation of such a number of men being at an end, while it was so very difficult, if not, in the great majority of cases, so impossible, on their part, to obtain other regular employment, or means of subsistence, in the strange country which France was to them…

(P189) Accordingly, “the route between St Germains and Paris,” writes Dr Doran, “was not safe, because of them; and they added murder to robbery, when they met with resistance. One Irish Jacobite trooper, named Francis O’Neil, was broken alive upon the wheel, for the double crime of plunder, and assassination. Two other ex-soldiers in James’s service, Englishmen, lacked nerve to take their chance against stout travellers on the road; but they practised the double profession above named, in a quieter and more cowardly way. On pretence of being ill, they sent for a physician, and, when the latter entered their apartment, they fell upon, stabbed, and robbed him. The law was stringently applied to these Jacobite ruffians, whose desperate crimes testify at once to their own utter destitution, and the fallen condition pf their Sovereign.”

In fine, “the town of St Germains became almost uninhabitable, through the sanguinary violence of the Jacobite brigands. No sober citizen dared venture abroad at night, even in the summer-time, and, to what extent, pilage and murder were carried, by the fierce and hungry partisans who had followed the standard of James, may be seen in the fact, that, on one and the same day, 5 Irish soldiers were ‘broken alive’, in St Germains, for the crime of robbery and assassination, by night, in the town, or its vicinity.”

As to the Irish Jacobite officers, the hardships, which the reform in question inflicted upon the multitude of unfortunate gentlemen subjected to it, appear, from the consequent representation of their case to Louis in April. “The Irish officers, who have been reformed in France,” says my authority, in May 1698, “have presented a Petition to the King, to inform him of the state they are in, and to entreat assistance from him. They represented to him:

That they have remained silent until now, in expectation of what it might be his Majesty’s pleasure to order respecting them; but that the extreme necessity, to which they have been reduced, has constrained them to break that silence, in order to lay before his Majesty the pitiable condition of their affairs.

That they had fought, during 10 years, in defence of their religion, and of their legitimate Sovereign, with all the zeal, and all the fidelity, that could be required of them, and with a devotion, unparalleled, except among those of their unhappy nation.

That, for this cause, they had made a sacrifice of those who were the authors of their birth, of their relatives, their properties, their country, and their lives.

That they had the happiness of rendering some important services to his Majesty, by a diversion of 3 years, during which they had sustained, in Ireland, the brunt of the choicest troops of his enemies (ie the Allies).

That they had subsequently served in (P190) France, with a zeal scarcely differing from that of the King’s natural subjects; as his Generals, under whose commands they were placed, had borne testimony to his Majesty.

That, by the Peace, they not only found themselves deprived of the properties to which they had legitimate claims, but were likewise prohibited returning to their country under pain of death. (In the Declaration from the Williamite “Camp, by Lymerick, the 5^th of Oct 1691, to the officers and soldiers of the Irish army”…. The Irish military “being at full and entire liberty to chuse what part they will take; but if once they go into France, they must not expect to return into this kingdom again.” Of the penalty, on being found guilty of doing so, without a special permission from King William, we have at Cork, under the date of 1699-1700, or even after the termination pf the war between France and England by the Treaty of Ryswick, an Instance, in the Memoirs of Capt Peter Drake of Drakeath In the County of Meath. “There was,” he says, “at that time, in the prison, one Capt Barrett, under sentence of death, for returning from France, without the King’s sign manual, which the laws then required.”)

That they could not look for an asylum among the other Christian Princes, to whom they could assign no other reason for their unhappiness, but that of having served his Majesty, and their own Sovereign, against them.

That those Princes would have no regard for them under existing circumstances, since, during the war, they had refused to enter their service, when, after the loss of Ireland, they decided on passing into France.

That neither could they any longer remain in the service of their Master, since he had not been mentioned in the Peace, and he was not in a condition to help them. (Yet, writes Sir David Nairne, of James- “He was very charitable; and as there were a great many of his poor, faithful subjects at St Germains, who had lost their fortunes to follow him, he was touched with their condition, and retrenched, as much as he could, to assist them. He used to call, from time to time into his cabinet, some of these bashful, indigent persons, of all ranks; to whom he distributed, folded up in small pieces of paper, 5, 10, 15, or 20 pistoles, more of less, according to the merit, the quality, and the exigency of each.” Sir David was with the King of St Germain, and passed “upwards of 46 years” in his service, or that of his son.)

That they therefore entirely placed their hopes in the goodness and in the compassion of his Majesty from whom alone they had some right to expect some relief.

That they would not represent to him, that the Huguenots, who had quitted the service of his Majesty, were advantageously supported, and put into possession of the inheritances of his suppliants, because his Majesty was in a position, rather to give, than to receive, examples of charity, and of compassion.

That they were satisfied with representing to him, that they had no way of making out a subsistence, in a foreign country, except by casting themselves at the feet of his Majesty.

That such of them, as would be fit for other occupations than those of war, had neither the means, nor the friends, necessary to enable them so to apply themselves.

That it had pleased his Majesty to promise the reformed allowance to Captains, and Lieutenants who chose to remain attached to their regiments; but that this reformed allowance was so trifling, that scarcely could it supply them with indifferent food, without leaving them anything for clothing.

That the condition of the Sub-Lieutenants and of the Ensigns was much more lamentable still, since they had only been promised the pay of common soldiers, a very small recompense, for a service of 10 years, to persons, most of them with a wife and children.

(P191) That an exclusion from every mode of earning their bread had been the result of the disposal of their own time allowed by his Majesty to the Sub-Lieutenants of his troops, whose service had not been so long as theirs.

That they could not avail themselves of the dismissal which his Majesty had ordered to be granted to those who should wish for it, unless he might have the goodness to obtain for them the permission to return to their own country, which they were prohibited doing, under pain of death.

That they most humbly prayed his Majesty to cause some of the effects of his accustomed goodness and charity to be experienced by men, whose misfortunes had proceeded from their attachment to the service of their King, the ally of his Majesty, and to that of his Majesty himself.

That they prayed him, to afford them the means of continuing in his service, with the same attachment which they had hitherto displayed. Or, if his Majesty’s affairs afforded no occasion for retaining them in his service, they prayed him most humbly, to recommend them to some other Prince, or State, that might employ them.”

This appeal of the Irish officers, which appears to have been drawn up for presentation to the King, with the understanding that it would be agreeable to his Majesty, was received as it deserved to be. The petitioners obtained their request from Louis, to be formed into a distinct corps of officers, to serve wherever he might be desirous of employing them; and they are referred to, in connexion with an abstract of their subsequent conduct, as “an invincible phalanx, that, if owing much to the munificence of the French Monarch, was, upon all occasions, deserving of the honourable treatment experienced from him.” Some of these officers passed into Spain with Louis’s grandson, Philip V., in December 1700. Others, after acting very effectively, under the Marshals de Montrevel, Villars and Berwick, against the Huguenots of the Cevennes, were attached to the expedition of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart (or in Jacobite language King James III.) when he sailed from Dunkirk in March 1708 with the Chevalier de Forbrn, to endeavour to land in Scotland.

(P192) On the death of King James II at the Palace of St Germain-en-Laye, Sept 16^th 1701, his only legitimate son, James Francis Edward Stuart born Prince of Wales at St James’s Palace, London June 20^th 1688, was considered by the numerous adherents of his family, of the Protestant as well as Catholic religion to the Sovereign de jure, though no de facto, of the British Isles, as James III of England and Ireland, and James VIII of Scotland.

As can be seen by the above description of the dire straits in which the Irish Brigade soldiers found themselves following the reduction in troops in 1697-8, it would appear that Walter may have found himself in a similar situation, which would explain why he had returned to England without licence in January 1698.

Walter may have returned to St Germain-en-Laye. A record in The Parochial Register of St Germain-en-Laye, Jacobite Extracts of Births Marriages and Deaths, [8] has the following record:

CALAHAN-MIREBEAU (marriage) 1699, 23 Fev., Denis Callahan, tailleur, f. defunct Germain, et de Marie Conel. Irl.- Catherine Mirebeau ff. Noel Mirebeau, et D’Anne Pincon. WW. (Witnesses) Jean Baptiste Omelane, docteur en medicine, Noel Mirebeau, père de l’espouse, Claude Pinçon, son oncle, Charles Milot, Guillaume Brennen, Walter Butlere. SS (Signatures) Catherine Mirebeau, Noel Mirebeau, T.B. Omeland, Guilam Brenan. Walter Butler, Pinson, Charles Millon.

(As the date is in Feb 1699, it may have been 1700 under the Gregorian calendar.)

NB. There are several entries in the Parish Registers for the births of Richard and Lucy Butler’s nine children whose godparents/sponsors were named as: King James II, Queen Mary, Prince James, Princess Louise, James fitzStuart Duke of Berwick (illeg. son of James II), Lord Galmoy, and various other high ranking members of the Royal Court of Saint Germain .

In a petition written by Walter Butler in 1715 (see next chapter for full details), he claimed that when he quit the French service he was a Lieutenant Colonel of Foot. He also claimed that he switched allegiance to the Imperial Army under Prince Eugene of Savoy following the Queen's Proclamation. This would appear to have been about 1702-03, at the beginning of the Wars of the Spanish Succession, between France and Spain against the allied armies of the Holy Roman Empire and Great Britain. This war would last until 1713 during which hundreds of thousands of lives were lost. Walter's military career will be explored in detail in the next chapter, however, his father who was of advanced age, desperately wanted the return of his only son and heir to his estate in Co. Wexford.

WALTER BUTLER SNR'S PETITIONS FOR HIS SON'S ATTAINDER TO BE REPEALED

In 1700, Walter’s father, Col. Walter Butler Senior, began his campaign to petition for permission for his only son and heir to return to Wexford:

14 May 1700, Petition of Walter Butler (Snr) of Catherlagh and Wexford: [9]

To the King’s Most Excellent Majesty

The Humble Petition of Coll. Walter Buttler

Sheweth

That as on Evidence of Your Petitioners good behaviour towards Your Majesty’s protestant subjects of Ireland during the late troubles the Grand Jurys of the Countyes of Catherlough and Wexford, have by solemn addresses signed by the sd Grand Jurys made it their request to the Lords Justices of Ireland that they would be pleased to recommend Your Petitioners humble ___ to Your Majesty for obtaining Your Royal Lycence for Your Petitioners only Sonn who is a youth and has been for some years in France to returne into Ireland as by a copy of one of the Sd addresses hereunto annexed may appear. That the Sd addresses being laid before the Lords Justices & Councill in Ireland they were of opinion (as will be certified if required by such of the Sd Privy Councill as are now here) that Your Petitioner was herein a proper object of Your Majestys Clemency, but thought it not fitt for them to interpose but rather directed Your Petitioner to make his humble application to Your Majesty.

That Your Petitioner upon there Encouragement presumes in Most humble manner to beg before Your Majesty, that he has but this only Son, that Your Petitioner’s Estate being but a

very small one, & by his owne acquisition (as by the annexed address of the Grand Jury may appear) he may dispose of it as he thinks fitt, so that the publick can loose nothing by Your Majesty’s allowing him the comfort of his Sons returne That the best of your Majesty’s protestant Subjects in Your Petitioners neighbourhood will engage for your Petitioner’s Sons future fidelity and good behaviour towards your Majesty’s Government all which considered.

Your Petitioner most humbly prays that your Majesty will be graciously pleased to give order, that Your Petitioner may have such Licence as the Law Requires for his Sons return to Ireland

And Your Petitioner is in Duty bound

Shall _-pray Sd. W

Attached message:

Lds Justices of Ireland

Whitehall 30 May 1700

My Lords

I give your Lordships this trouble only to acknowledge the Receipt of your Letters of the 18, & 14 & 20^th ___ the first of which requires no answer and the other two the King has _- given no Directions upon.

My Lords

Your Lordships

Most humble and obedient Servant

Jersey [10]

In the petition Walter states that his son “is a youth” and “has been for some years in France”. He neglects to say that his son was actually 25 yrs of age and had been fighting for the French in the rank of Lt. Colonel. He also states that his estate was a small one which he had acquired himself. At this time, which was before the Forfeitures Act, Walter not only had his own considerable properties, but also held the leases of his stepson Lord Galmoy’s properties. In a later petition he stated he owned 5000 acres.

The petition was annexed by a letter from Lord Jersey (at Hampton Court) to the lords justices of Ireland, transmitting the petition to the king of Col. Walter Butler for consideration and report: [11]

The petition of col. Walter Butler shewith: that, as evidence of the petitioner’s good behaviour towards your Majesty’s Protestant subjects of Ireland during the late troubles, the grand juries of the counties of Catherlough and Wexford requested the lords justices of Ireland to recommend his suit for your licence for his only son, who is a youth and has been for some years in France, to return to Ireland: that the lords justices thought it not fit to interpose: that the petitioner’s estate being very small and by his own acquisition, he may dispose of it as he thinks fit, so that the public can lose nothing by your Majesty’s allowing him the comfort of his son’s return.

On 19 May 1700, His Majesty’s response was forwarded to the Lords Justices of Ireland by Lord Jersey, requesting their consideration and report:[12]

Abt Col. Walter Butler’s son,

Hampton Court 19 May 1700

The King being moved upon the enclosed Petition of Col. Walter Butler praying for his Majesty’s Lycence for his sons return to Ireland from France, His Majesty is pleased to direct the same be referred to Your Lordships that you may consider the Petitioner’s allegation and report your opinion therein, upon which His Majesty will declare his further pleasure.

His petition was obviously rejected, probably because his son remained under attainder.

The following response to Galmoy’s uncle’s descendants who applied to claim his attainted title after the deaths of Galmoy and his nephews and heirs, explains why a Parliamentary bill would be required to lift Walter Junior’s attainder:

Statute of the 9^th Will III Chap 5, after reciting that Pierce, then Viscount Galmoy, and the third of that title, did amongst other evil and wicked disposed papists, contrary to their allegiance and duty, utterly refuse to submit to his Majesty’s government, and did encourage rebellion in Ireland; it was thereby enacted that all and every the convictions, outlawries, and attainders in this kingdom, of any person or persons whatsoever, for high treason or rebellion, not reversed or pardoned before the 29^th July 1697 (other than as therein), should be and remain sufficient and effectual in the law for ever to all intents and constructions and purposes, any error, inefficiency, or other defect in form or matter in them or any of them to the contrary notwithstanding; and that no judgement upon any writ of error or plea, nor any pardon from his Majesty, his heirs or successors, should anywise operate to the prejudice or to the invalidating of such conviction, outlawry, and attainders, except such as were therein before excepted, any law, usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding:- In consequence of this statute, we submit whether anything short of an Act of Parliament can reverse the attainder thereby created.[13]

As Walter had still not been granted a licence to return home despite his father’s efforts, and due to the reduction of Irish forces in the French service, Walter Junior switched his allegiance to the allies and joined the forces of the Austro-Hungarian Army. According to Walter in a later petition, he ‘came over’ following Queen Anne’s Proclamation which must have been after her accession on 8 March 1702.

His change of allegiance may have been at the urging of his father, as his father’s sole heir, and the influence of his mother’s nephew (son of her sister Mary), Walter’s cousin Francis Taaffe Earl of Carlingford to whom he “repaired after quitting France”, and who then offered an introduction to Prince Eugene of Savoy, commander of the Austro-Hungarian army. (Taaffe died in August 1704). Francis Taaffe, 3rd Earl of Carlingford was in the service of the Duke of Lorraine as Chancellor of State and Cabinet, chief minister and commander-in-chief of Lorraine’s army allied with the Imperial Army of the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I, fighting a renewed war with France in the War of the Spanish Succession that began in November 1701. It is not clear in which year this occurred, however Walter’s father stated in late 1703,[14] that his son “hath long since quitted France and went to Lorraine to the Earl of Carlingford, his cozen german, etc”. (Carlingford and Walter’s mothers were sisters.) Francis Taaffe, born in 1639, had grown up in the Imperial Court, appointed as page to Emperor Ferdinand and in service of the exiled Duke Charles of Lorraine who also resided at the Imperial Court. In his will, Duke Charles described Taaffe as his special friend and placed him in charge of his son and heir. He gained fame as commander of Taaffe’s Regiment of Cuirassiers, rising to the rank of Lt. General of Horse and Field Marshall in Austria, having distinguished himself at the battles of Vienna and in the Turkish campaigns. He was honoured with membership of the Order of the Golden Fleece and was sent on many diplomatic missions. By the treaty of Ryswick, Lorraine was restored to the young Duke Leopold through the efforts of his father’s close friend and counsellor Francis Taaffe. The Duke sent Taaffe to reorganise his Duchy, and as soldiers were needed for the ducal service, Taaffe sent out an invitation for unemployed Irish soldiers to sign up, deputing his friend and fellow Imperial officer Major Maurice Kavanagh of Ferns (Co. Wexford) to negotiate with them. Kavanagh recruited a group of officers, many of whom were kinsmen and from Leinster, forming a regiment under his command.[15] This may be when Walter Butler joined the Imperial Service. At the outbreak of hostilities, Taaffe and his newly recruited army joined with the Imperial army. In a letter written many years previously, Taaffe had facetiously commented on “the irrepressible tendency of his relatives in Ireland to quarter their sons and nephews upon him, usually without any means of subsidence”.[16]

Walter’s father petitioned the Irish Parliament once again to repeal his son’s attainder:

An Act for the Relief of Walter Butler Junior Only Son and heir apparent of Col Walter Butler of Mumphin (sic Munphin) in the County of Wexford [17]

Although undated, it was submitted in the period known as Queen Anne,( ie. 1702-1714). The “late Siege of Landau” is mentioned, which took place in October-November 1703. Another document, from the Journals of the House of Commons of the Kingdom of Ireland, (see after Petition) places this Petition in late November 1703 and read in the House of Commons in Feb-March 1703/1704:

The Petition states:

“An Act for the Relief of Walter Butler junior, son and heir apparent of Col. Walter Butler of Mumphin (Munphin) co. Wexford, that all outlawries and attainders of treason against him may be repealed.

Whereas the said Col Walter Butler sent his said son Walter Butler Junior in the Year 1689 (being then but fourteen Years old) into France to avoid the troubles that then grew very Mischievous and hot in this Kingdom. During such Troubles the said Col Walter Butler was not able to send him any supply and whereas the said Walter Butler Junior hath long since quitted France and went to Lorraine to the Earle of Carlingford his Cozen German who Recommended him to Prince Eugene of Savoy who gave him a Troop of Curassiers under his Own Command where he still continues. And Whereas the said Col Walter Butler being in considerable Employments in the late King James his time, by his Care and unwearied Diligence in the prosecution and putting a stop to the violent and outrageous spirits of the Irish, hath preserved many of the Protestant subjects of this Kingdom from being ruined in those distracted times as by Severall Certificates under the Hands of the Grand Jurys of the Countys of Wexford and Kilkenny and Catherlagh do they appear Whereby they made it their Request that a pardon and License to Returne home may be granted to the said Walter Butler Junior. And Whereas the said Walter Butler Junior hath been Eminently Servicable in his said Station in the Emperors Service and particularly in the late Siege of Landau against the French by heading a party that Sallyed out of that Garrison and that his said father hath no Estate but what he acquired himself which therefore he may dispose of as he thinks fitt so that there is nothing to come to the Crowne or the Publick by the Attainder or Absence of the said Walter Butler Junior, may it therefore please Your Majestie at the humble request of Your Majesties Dutifull Subject the said Col Walter Butler that it may be enacted and be it Enacted by the Queens Most Excellent Majestie by and with the Advice and consent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons in this present Parliament Assembled and by Authority of the Same that all Outlawries and Attainders of Treason against the said Walter Butler Junior in this Kingdom DSc, and are hereby set aside Reversed, Repealed, Taken off and declared Null and Void and that it shall and may be lawfull to and for the said Walter Butler Junior without any further or Other License to Return into this Kingdome and Live here as her Majesties Subject Any Act of Parliament heretofore passed in this Kingdome to the Contrary in any wise notwithstanding Provided Never-the-less that the said Walter Butler Junior shall not by vertue of this Act be restored to any Estates, Lands, Tenements, Hereditaments, Goods or Chattles by him forfeited by the said Attainder and Outlawries.

MEMORANDUM OF PROCEEDINGS IN ENGLAND & IRELAND RELATIVE TO THE BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF WALTER BUTLER

This Bill was transmitted hither last year by the Lord Lieut. and Councill of Ireland under the broad Seal of the Kingdom for Her Majesties approbation; thereupon Her Majestie in Councill referred it to the Attorney and Solliciter General of this Kingdom, and upon their Report the Queen in Councill was pleased to Give it Her Royal Approbation; and so it was sent back into Ireland under the Great Seal of this Kingdom, in order to be past into an Act of Parliament there. It past the House of Lords, and for want of time it dropt in the House of Commons, the Sessions being ended, before it could be read a third time. If his Grace the Duke of Marlborough will be pleased to recommend it to the Secretaries of State and Warr here the Substance of it may be formed into a Clause in Correspondence with France or some other Bill that is likely to pass this session.

The Memorandum above states that “for want of time it dropt in the House of Commons,… before it could be read a third time.” However, the Journal entries of the House of Commons give a very different resolution:

The Journals of the House of Commons of the Kingdom of Ireland from 18 May 1613 to 24 Dec 1713 [18]

Vol III- Dublin Page139

Sabbati, 26 Die February 1703 (ie.1704)

An engrossed Bill from the Lords, intituled an Act for the Relief of Walter Butler, only Son and Heir apparent of Colonel Walter Butler of Mumphin in the County of Wexford, was read a first Time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday, next.

Page 146

Mercurij, 1 Die Matij 1703 (1704)

Resolved, that this House will, to-morrow, at twelve o’clock, resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into Consideration an engrossed Bill from the Lords intituled an Act for the Relief of Walter Butler , junior, only Son and Heir apparent of Colonel Walter Butler of Mumphin, in the County of Wexford.

Page 148

Jovis, 2 Die Martij (March) 1703 (1704)

The House, according to the Order for the Day, resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into Consideration an engrossed Bill from the Lords, intituled An Act for the relief of Walter Butler junior etc., and several Members were examined in relation to Colonel Butler’s Behaviour to the Protestants in the late Rebellion, and concerning young Mr Butler’s going into France, and after some Time spent therein Mr Speaker resumed the Chair, and Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer reported from the said Committee that they had gone through the said Bill, and that he was directed to report when the House will please to receive the same.

Ordered that the Report be made to-morrow Morning.

Page 152

Veneris 3 Die Martij 1703 (1704)

Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, according to Order, reported from the Committee of the whole House, appointed to take into Consideration an engrossed Bill from the Lords, intituled an Act for the Relief of Walter Butler junior etc., that they had gone through the said Bill, Paragraph by Paragraph and disagreed to every Paragraph thereof, to which resolution, the Question being put, the House did agree.

Resolved, that the said Bill be rejected.

On November 27, 1703, Southwell sent Lord Nottingham, (viz. Daniel Finch 2^nd Earl of Nottingham, Secretary of State in the ministry of Godolphin in 1702, retired in 1704, due to the influence of Godolphin’s in-laws, the Duchess and Duke of Marlborough who were placing their own kin in positions of power) a number of Irish bills including one marked Col. Walter Butler. [19] On December 24 1703, Nottingham sent this with others to the Attorney-General (James Wall). It was described as ‘a private bill for the relief of Walter Butler’: [20]

Whitehall Dec 24 1703

I send you herewith a Trunk containing severall Irish Bills both Publick and Private, as also another Private Bill for the relief of Walter Butler transmitted hither by the Ld Lieutenant and Councill of Ireland; these together with four letters relating to them I send you now to gain time, that you and Mn. Solicitor may consider of them and bring them to the Councill and then they will be referred to you in Town.

I am &c

Nottingham

This would have referred to the petition and bill above.

On March 4, 1703/4, Southwell sent Nottingham a list of bills dropped by the Irish Parliament during this session and ‘notes thereon’, including Colonel Butler- ‘having past a severe law against Popery, they had no mind to encourage anyone bred up in arms in foreign service to return.’ [21]

SP 63/364 f.90 p556-8

The rejection of this Bill by the House of Commons, although passed by the House of Lords, displayed the wide and bitter divisions in Irish society at that time. While both houses of parliament consisted of only Protestants, the Old English Catholic gentry who had inhabited their lands for many generations, were still held in respect by many of the old Protestant aristocracy, but were held in contempt by the ‘New English’ gentry. Held in particular contempt and distrust were those Papists soldiers, who had joined the French service. Many reports were circulating about these officers returning to recruit Irish and Scottish youth in the cause of James’s son James III, his father having died 16 September 1701. Also, in this case, their obvious contempt may have been exacerbated by Col Walter Butler’s relationship with his despised stepson, Pierce Lord Galmoy.

While Galmoy’s exploits during the Jacobite rebellion were viewed as courageous by his peers, [22] his Protestant enemies held him in great dislike and revulsion. An example of this view of Galmoy was expressed some 130 years later in a fictional novel based on fact, written about the Jacobite rebellion by prominent Protestant authors, the O’Hara family, called “The Boyne Water” [23], in which the author described the Siege of Derry, and painted Galmoy in a very unflattering light:

They saw, sitting on the grass, before his tent, and surrounded by inferior officers, a person whose uniform proclaimed him of some importance, but whose features, air, and general expression, caused a sentiment of dislike and fear rather than of deference. He was about forty years of age, his body and limbs coarse and muscular; his nose hooked, his eye grey, small, indolent, and cruel. The pallid, overshadowing brows; the lank, colorless hair that hung at either side of his face, and the long, thick moustache of the same which fell over his upper lip- gave to his whole visage an inexpressible character of cool ferocity. This was Lord Galmoy- the disgrace of the cause he abetted, the terror and aversion of those he oppressed- one of the bad spirits that, in every time of convulsion, are let loose to afright and disgust- who went forth to the destroying of his fellow-creatures as if summoned to a banquet- and who, from all that can be gathered, warranted Oldmixon in defining him as a man ‘whom no titles could honor’.

O’Hara quoted John Oldmixon, an English Protestant, who wrote in 1716 “Memoirs of Ireland from the Restoration to the Present Time” [24] in which he described Galmoy thus: There was among them an infamous Wretch, whom no Titles could honour; Pierce Butler, Viscount Galmoy. He then describes several incidents of disgraceful and dishonourable treatment of innocent Protestant civilians, including women, who came within their reach. Whether these accounts of atrocities were true, or merely Protestant propaganda, is unknown- if true, they are an appalling indictment of Galmoy’s morality and lack of humanity, or, of his leadership of his officers and troops who were allowed to commit such excesses. It has been suggested that his motivation was to intimidate the population holding out under siege, to surrender, through fear of his terrible retribution if they did not.

Thomas Babington Macauley wrote: “Lord Galmoy was of all the Irish captains the most dreaded and the most abhorred by the Protestants. For he had disciplined his men with rare skill and care, and many frightful stories were told of his barbarity and perfidy.”[25]

The resultant bitterness towards the supposed perpetrators of such reported acts, and towards anyone associated with them is understandable, and may explain the response of the House of Commons. Given the Butler’s close personal association with James II, this also may have caused mistrust and dislike, enough to hold an unsympathetic view towards his request.

The resultant reaction by Walter Butler is a prime example of the powerful connections Butler held at this time, that the rejection of this Bill by the Irish House of Commons was not going to defeat his plans to restore his son and heir to his rightful place. Walter then by-passed the Irish Parliament and went straight to the English Parliament sending the bill to Captain General John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough. The reasons for choosing to send it to Marlborough are unclear. Marlborough’s close relationship and influence with Queen Anne may have been a factor, as well as his growing friendship with the Imperial Ambassador Count Wratislaw (of whom presently). However, this was during a time of internal struggle for political supremacy between the High Tory party and the Whigs, so the timing of Walter’s petition was unfortunate.

The Memorandum accompanying the Bill, gave a completely different resolution to that reported in the Irish Parliament, and then suggested a rather underhanded method of having it passed[26]:

If his Grace the Duke of Marlborough will be pleased to recommend it to the Secretaries of State and Warr here the Substance of it may be formed into a Clause in Correspondence with France or some other Bill that is likely to pass this session.

As Marlborough had left England for The Hague in March to re-join his forces, the new Secretary of State (May 1704- Dec.1706), Nottingham’s successor Sir Charles Hedges, was charged with dealing with the matter. He wrote to the Duke of Ormonde, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland:[27]

(To) Duke of Ormonde

Whitehall 1st May 1704

A Petition of Walter Butler Junr praying Her Majesty’s Lycence to come into England having been laid before the Queen, I am commanded by Her Majesty to transmit it to your Grace for your Consideration & Report, & particularly upon a matter of Fact therein alledged of a Bill being transmitted from Ireland hither, & sent back thither again, which passed the House of Lords, & for want of time was lost in the House of Commons, upon which Report her Majesty will declare her further Pleasure in relation to the Petitioner’s Request __ &c.

(signed) C. Hedges

Ormonde’s response has not yet come to light, but it would appear that this strategy also proved fruitless, possibly due to some rather unfortunate rumours spreading at that time, of Irish Papists who had returned ‘without license’ from France and were enlisting officers and men in Ireland, including accusations against Walter’s half-brother Colonel Richard Butler (of Galmoy). With such alarming rumours abounding, it is therefore not surprising that Walter’s “Bill for Relief” was rejected.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Irish Parliament had informed the House that “they had gone through the said Bill, Paragraph by Paragraph and disagreed to every Paragraph thereof ”;

And that “several Members were examined in relation to Colonel Butler’s Behaviour to the Protestants in the late Rebellion, and concerning young Mr Butler’s going into France”.

Unusually the House had “resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into Consideration an engrossed Bill from the Lords”, which indicates the importance with which they regarded this particular Bill.

Col. Walter Butler Snr, according to his petition, although Catholic, was held in high esteem by many in the Wexford community, particularly the long established “Old English” families, and according to him, he had “preserved many of the Protestant subjects from being ruined” and subsequently they, and the members of the Grand Juries, had supported Col. Walter’s request that his son be pardoned and given license to return home. The members of the House of Commons disagreed with this statement, many of whom belonged to or were associated with the ‘newly’ settled English families, described disparagingly as ‘Cromwellians’ and ‘Williamites’, rejected by the ‘Old English’ and Old Irish Wexford residents as ‘usurpers’ who had taken their lands in the Acts of Settlement instituted by Cromwell forty years previously. They had no long-term association with, nor held any loyalty to the “Old English” families who had held power in Ireland for centuries.

Some time after the Bill’s rejection, Walter Butler Junior addressed a similarly-worded petition to Nottingham’s successor, Sir Charles Hedges, by way of ‘the German envoy’ Count Wratislaw). [28]

The file contains several documents relating to the case of Walter Butler junior 1705,[29] (notably, in very poor condition and difficult to decipher): his petition; the bill; a document outlining the points made in the petition; and includes a transcript of a letter written by Walter to Hedges. The top of this letter is titled Emperor Leopold to Queen Anne, dated Vienna 12 April 1704, and states the letter is written in Latin and signed by the Emperor ( in Foreign Royal Letters). It is then followed by a transcript of Walter’s letter:

__ Emperor Leopold to Queen Anne

Colonel(?) Butler’s service & recommends him to the Queen’s favour.

Dated Vienna 12 April 1704

This Letter in Latin & Signed by the Emperor

Has been moved to “__ Foreign Royal letters

M10 (Germany’s Emperor)

Col Butler to Hedges

I beg you not to read the petn (petition) the German Envoy (viz Count Wratislaw) gave you this day till the Duke of Ormond is present who best knows the case(?) unless the rest of the Lords are pleased to refer it to his Grace for report.

The Holy Roman Emperor’s envoy to London, Johann Wenzel Count Wratislaw, was a close friend, advisor and confidant to Prince Eugene of Savoy, and Walter probably entrusted Wratislaw with the petition on his return visit to Vienna. This would account for the considerable time taken to deal with the matter.

The petition in State Archives is dated 12 April 1704 (on the side, possibly by UK archives, as the Emperor’s letter of recommendation is dated then), however the attached Bill mentions the late Earl of Carlingford (d. August 1704) and the late Emperor (viz. Leopold I, d. 5 May 1705), so the petition must have been written after that date of 5 May 1705.

The Humble petition of Walter Butler the younger

To the Queens most excellent Majesty

The humble Petition of Walter Butler Junior

Sheweth,

That in the year 1689 Your Petitioner being but 14 years old, was sent into France to avoid the then Troubles, and sometime after entered into the Emperors Service and had the command of a Troop of Cuirassiers, in which Station Your Petitioner served the late Emperor for severall Years with due Zeal and Fidelity, under the Conduct of Prince Eugene of Savoy, but during his absence had the misfortune to be outlawed in Ireland for High Treason.

That your Petitioners Father having considerable Employments in the late King James’s time, did render his Protestant Neighbours such services, that the Grand Juries of the three adjoining Counties made it their humble request to the then Lords Justices of Ireland, that a Pardon might be granted to your Petitioner and the__

rather for that nothing was to come to the Crown or Publick by your Petitioners Attainder.

May it therefore please Your most excellent Majesty to sign the annexed Bill for reversing your Petitioners Attainder and to grant your Royall Allowance for bringing the same in the most noble and honourable house of Peers,

And Your Petitioner is in Duty bound shall ever pray &c.

(page 2) An Act for reversing the Attainder and Outlawry of Walter Butler Junior the only son of Collonel Walter Butler of Munphin in the County of Wexford and Kingdom of Ireland

Whereas the said Walter Butler the younger was in the Year One Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty Nine, being then but 14 Years old, sent into France to avoid the Troubles and Disorders in Ireland and sometime afterwards quitted France and repaired to his Kinsman the late Earle of Carlingford, by whose recommendation he got the Command of a Troop of Cuirassiers, and in that Station did serve the late Emperor for severall Years with due Zeal and Fidelity. And whereas the said Collonel Walter Butler, having considerable Employments in Ireland under the late King James, did by his unwearied Diligence, restrain and check the outrageous and mischievous Spirits

Of the turbulent Irish, and preserved many of his Protestant Neighbours from Ruine and Distruction in those tumultuous times; in consideration whereof the respective Grand Juries of the Countys of Wexford, Kilkenny and Catherlough made it their humble request to the then Lords Justices of Ireland that a Pardon might be granted to the said Walter Butler the Younger, and the rather for that nothing was to come to the Crown or Publick by the Attainder of the said Walter Butler Junior, in regard his said Father had Power to dispose of his Estate as he should think fitt, It being all of his own acquisition. May it therefore please Your most Excellent Majesty at the humble request of your Majestys dutifull subject the said Walter Butler the Younger that it may be enacted,

AND BE IT ENACTED by the Queens most excellent Majesty by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporall and Commons in this present Parliament assembled And by the Authority of the same That all Outlawrys and Attainders of Treason against the said Walter Butler Junior in the Kingdom of Ireland Be and hereby sett aside, reversed repealed taken off and declared null and void; Provided never the less that the said Walter Butler Junior shall not by Virtue of this Act be restored to any Estate Lands Tenements Hereditaments Goods or Chattles by him, forfeited by reason of the said Attainders or Outlawrys.

At this time, the response to the proposed Bill is unknown, however, subsequent events would suggest this also failed to be passed, probably obstructed once again by the Irish House of Commons or the Lords Justices of Ireland, still afraid of allowing any Catholic ‘bred up in arms in foreign service’ to return.

Significantly, Sir Charles Hedges was promoted due to the influence of the Earl of Rochester, Laurence Hyde.[30] Hedges replaced Nottingham on 18 May 1704, as Secretary of State for the Southern Department, however, due to the influence of Sarah Duchess of Marlborough over Queen Anne, he was replaced in December 1706 by Marlborough’s son-in-law the Earl of Sunderland. Lord Rochester, Laurence Hyde, the brother-in-law of James II (being brother to James II’s first wife Anne Hyde), would later have close ties with the Butlers of Munphin through their link with the Keightleys (discussed in detail later).

The Secretary of State (June 1700-Jan 1702) Mr James Vernon wrote to George Stepney Esq dated March 3 1701-2, Whitehall, in which he says: [31]

… I told you in my last of Count Wratislau’s concerning himself in solicitations for Roman Catholics. He has since sent me the case in a petition of the party to the King. It is from two sisters of Mr Keightley, who live in Dorsetshire (Viz. Athelhampton, the Long estate); one is the widow Long, and the other unmarried. I understand they are both furiously bigoted, and on that account their neighbours have no good will towards them. … but they keep a busy priest in their house, who calls in foreign aid. It is much fitter that we should send him away, and perhaps that will be the end of it.

This is the first reference to the association between Count Wratislau, the Keightleys and the Butlers. Walter Junior would marry the daughter of the ‘Mrs Long, sister of Mr Thomas Keightley, as referred to, and which will be discussed in detail in the chapter on Walter’s marriage.

The rumours of Irish officers returning from France unlicensed and enlisting Irish men for service in France, were spreading alarm.

A letter written by Thomas Southern to the Earl of Nottingham, Chief Secretary of State, was probably the source of Nottingham’s accusation. [32] The following letters and statements concerning a Colonel Butler involved in these activities, actually refer, in the main, to Walter’s half-brother Col. Richard Butler.

A long letter written by Southern to try to save a Protestant named Jemmy Boucher from imminent execution for “high treason for being in arms in the service of King James in Ireland (having served in the Duke of Berwick’s regiment in the reign of James II) and for returning from France without leave”, in which he made several accusations against Irish Papists who in his opinion deserved execution more than Boucher:

(note no punctuation marks, but spelling adjusted for readability)

Date: 1^st March 1703/4 [33]

my lord

can any man that has English blood in ‘s Veins avoid blushing; that: in a crowd of 500 persons I could enumerate come from france without leave, since her Sacred Majesty’s happy reign; Jemmy Boucher the only Englishman of any note amongst them (who is and ever was a true english church of England man) should be singled out to make an example of when so many Irish and Scotch Coll.s Majors Capt.s etc: all papists lately come over, daily, appear in hords in public Coffee house about Whitehall and St James: impudently bragging of their feats in france during the late war. To come to particulars, how come Coll: Buttler not to be so violently prosecuted as Boucher was: is not he an Irish papist. And his bro: the lord of gellmoy who is married to the Lady Waldegrave the late K: (King) J: (James) daughter a lieft. General in france: He and Coll. Poore/Power came hither from france above 18 months ago: the latter indeed was committed to Newgate, but was discharged soon after: how and upon what account I need not inform your Lordship. Then he went for Ireland upon no good design you may be sure. A man that went thither to list officers and men to be ready on the first occasion will not want pretences and excuses whilst he’s winked at. I do not understand what lenity he can expect from an English protestant government and that Boucher should at the same time be sacrificed. Coll Poore is and ever was an irish papist, always bloody and inveterate against the English nation and government and although he is now here, his regiment is preserved and continued to him in france, his pay and pension punctually remitted to him to London, his wife and children now plentifully provided for at St Germins by the French King; and I leave your Lordship to guess, for what:- after he dispatched his private commission in Ireland, the papists of that Country made a purse, and employed this same favourite Coll: to come to London as one of their chief agents to oppose an act which the irish parliament sent hither for approbation to prevent the growth of popery in Ireland and although this man was a Coll. In all the last irish war, and for 10 years after in france; and that he is outlawed in Ireland, and that he has doubly forfeited his life by coming clandestinely into England; yet Boucher is condemned; and this irish fellow under the above qualifications, is now in London, and is daily at most of the offices at Court, impudently soliciting for his rebellious Countrymen, and walks with a greater air of authority in St James park and about her Majesty’s Palace than any of the Colls of the guards do: the pretence of discharging him before; was want of evidence- let not that serve now: for I do hereby offer to produce several persons, on his trial to prove all that is here before recited: when he was in newgate before, if he was arraigned, no body knew the say: And if your lordship will get him now proceeded against, and make it known, you shall have witnesses enough and them let the world judge which ought to be made an example of he or Jemmy Boucher. (then continues to sing Boucher’s praises)

Coll: Butler mentioned in the beginning of my letter is in Ireland listing officers and men privately and the government there ought to be writ about him, and several other Irish officers lately gone thither. I am my lord your lordships most humble servant etc.

Thos: Southern

Thomas Southern wrote again on 8^th March 1703/4, in which he said in part:[34]

my lord

the day after unfortunate Boucher was sentenced to die, I writt to your lordship and enclosed it to the speaker of the house of the Commons, in hopes they would e’ioyn’ with your lordship in interceding to her Sacred Majesty to save the only protestant of note…etc.

I do once more offer your lordship to get you half a dozen creditable witnesses against Coll: Poor. Coll: Buttler Coll: macCarty. Capt. MacGrayth. Capt Holland. Major Maxwell. And an infinite deale more of Irish and Scotch papists who are come over in swarms, and with an intent to do mischief- all the officers above mentioned have their posts kept for them in france, and their pay, with pensions punctually remitted to them…. Whatever becomes of him (Boucher) I think your lordship would do well to get Coll: Poor and his gang secured:- I’ll answer with my head for witnesses enough: I am your lordships very humble servant to command.

Tho: Southern

Lord Nottingham then wrote to Edward Southwell Secretary of State Ireland on 9^th March 1703/4 [35]:

Yours received to March 4.

I hear Col. Butler is listing men privately in Ireland. Observe him, and make inquiry. He has lately come from France, and the fact is high treason.

The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (2^nd Duke of Ormonde) to Nottingham, dated 16 March 1704:[36]

Yours received. You mention a Col. Butler, who is listing men. I will inquire, but it will be hard, as there are many men of that name and title. I hope there is no likelihood of any design on this kingdom, for we are but in a bad condition to oppose any foreign enemy, having but few troops and not much money.

Southwell also wrote to Nottingham, March 16, 1704, stating: “I cannot learn of any Colonel Butler who is listing men.” [37]

Nottingham had neglected to specify which Col. Butler in particular he was referring to, despite Southern having informed him that he was Galmoy’s brother whom Ormonde would have instantly recognised. However, as Ormonde maintained a close relationship with his exiled Jacobite cousins, he may have been dissembling when he wrote his reply

According to Burkes 'Irish Family Records': Richard Butler, a colonel in the army and captain in the Royal Guards, a member of King James’s Bodyguard, spent 18 months in Newgate prison, said to be enlisting men in Ireland for French service. [38] Whether he confused him with Col. Power/Poor who had been imprisoned as mentioned, is not certain. It may have occurred at the same time as Power's imprisonment in 1702, or later, however Southern did not mention that Butler had also been imprisoned. Notably Richard's last two children were baptised at Saint Germain in May 1701 and September 1802.

Eleanor’s second son by her first husband Lord Galmoy, Colonel Richard Butler, had been dispatched by King James to France in exchange for the French auxiliaries. [39]

The Manuscripts of the Marquess of Ormonde: [40] Campaign of 1689-1690 in Ireland:

“The King being come to Dublin, sent a request to the most Christian monarch for five or six regiments of ould foot and in exchange of which he would send him as many regiments of his late raysed army. For this end his Majesty ordered to make ready for spring to goe into France the regiments of the Lord Viscount Mountcashel; Collonell Daniel O’Bryen of Clare; of Collonell Richard Butler of Galmoy; of Collonell Robert Fielding; and of Collonell Arthur Dillon of Costola. Over which body the said Mountcashel was appointed General.”

On arrival, Richard Butler and Robert Fielding’s regiments were incorporated into the other three. It is uncertain where Colonels Butler and Fielding were reassigned after this. They may have returned to Ireland with James II's personal guard, the Gardes du Corps otherwise Gardes du Roi d'Angleterre, in which Richard is recorded as a captain by 1692.

To bolster James’s position six regiments of French infantry had been exchanged for a similar number of Irish troops (the embryonic Mountcashel Brigade).[41]

Matthew O’Conor [42] wrote: The first formation of this celebrated corps (viz. the Irish Brigade in the service of France) was by way of exchange and an exchange in which France had much the advantage… they (viz. the French ministers) required in exchange for their own mercenaries and raw recruits, three of the choicest of James’s Irish Regiments. On the 7^th April 1690, Chateau Renaud’s fleet took on board at Kinsale 5000 Irish and landed them at Brest on the 23^rd of the same month. This Corps formed the first nucleus of the famous Irish Brigade.

The three regiments drafted out of Ireland were old and disciplined: Mountcashel’s commanded by the Viscount of that name; Clare’s by Daniel O’Brien, eldest son of Lord Clare; and Dillon’s by Arthur Dillon, second son of the Lord Viscount of that name. Each regiment consisted of two battalions of eight companies, each company comprised of 100. Each company had one captain, 2 lieutenants, 1 sub-lieutenant and an ensign, making for the three regiments, altogether 240 officers.

Richard became part of the Royal household personal guard living at Saint Germain, and his brother Pierce, Lord Galmoy, a Lieut.General with the French and Spanish armies, was appointed gentleman of the Bedchamber by James II until his death in 1702, and by his son and heir James III from 1703 to 1717. (Galmoy was rewarded with the Jacobite title Earl of Newcastle Co. Limerick by James II). Richard died at Saint Germain in January 1725 and Galmoy died in Paris in 1740. But that is another story.

Walter Butler Junior's switch of allegiance to the Imperial Army will be covered in the next chapter.

Contact: butler1802 @ hotmail.com (no spaces)

Link back to the Introductory page:

http://butlerancestryireland.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/butlers-co-wexford-ch1-richard-1stviscount-mountgarrett.html

Link back to Walter Butler Senior:

http://butlerancestryireland.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/butlers-of-co-wexford-ch-10-walter-butler-of-munphin-pt1.html

Links to all of the chapters in this blog:

Pierce Butler of Kayer Co. Wexford (the elder) c.1540-1599
http://butlerancestryireland.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/butlers-of-co-wexford-ch2-pierce-butler.html
Edward Butler of Kayer Co. Wexford, 1577-1628
http://butlerancestryireland.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/butlers-of-co-wexford-ch-3-edward-butler.html
Pierce Butler of Kayer and Moneyhore (the younger), c.1600-1652, Part I
http://butlerancestryireland.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/butlers-of-co-wexford-ch-4-pierce-butler.html

[1] John Cornelius O’Callaghan, History of the Irish Brigade in the Service of France, pub 1885, reprinted Bibliolife LLC, 2009, page 61, up to p142.

[2] In 1692, James renewed his scheme of an invasion of England, and after pressing it upon Louis XIV, an expedition on a large scale was fitted out by the French government. At Cape La Hogue, James found all the Irish Regiments in the French service, besides 10,000 French troops while Tourville lay at Brest with 45 men-of-war and numerous transports. The intended invasion fleet while waiting for favourable winds to sail, were attacked in harbour by the English and most of the ships and supplies went up in flames. The French fleet was defeated by the English fleet on the 19 May and on the 24 May, 13 ships were destroyed on the shore of La Hogue under the very eyes of James. After this catastrophe Louis XIV sent no further armament on behalf of James. Wikisource- Dictionary of National Biography 1885-1900, Volume 29, James II of England, by Adolphus William Ward

[3] Wikipedia- Treaty of Ryswick.

[4] John Cornelius O’Callaghan, History of the Irish Brigade in the Service of France, pub 1885, reprinted Bibliolife LLC, 2009, page 76, 149- 150

[5] SP 44/351, page 6- book of Warrants for Licences 1697/8 to 1706

[6] J.G. Simms, Irish Jacobites , Analecta Hibernica, No. 22 (1960), pp.52, 85, published by: The Irish Manuscripts Commission Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25511880 .Accessed: 24/04/2012 (source TCD Ms . MS N.1.3- report of the commission appointed in 1699 by the English parliament to inquire into the Irish forfeitures)

[7] John Cornelius O’Callaghan, op.cit, p188-191

[8] C.E. Lart (ed.), The Parochial Register of St. Germain-en-Laye, Jacobite Extracts of Births, Marriages and Deaths, (Volume 1: 1689-1702, Volume 2: 1703-1720), St Catherine Press London 1910, Vol I, p5,

[9] National Archives UK, ref: SP 67/2 manuscript page nos. 324 to 326 - petition unsuccessful as he re-petitioned after 1703

[10] Edward Villiers 1^st Earl of Jersey, cr.1697 (1656-1711) ;1699-1700 Sec of State for Southern Dept, 1700-1704 Lord Chamberlain to William III, and Queen Anne who dismissed him in 1704, after which he was concerned in some of the Jacobite schemes.

[11]Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, of the reign of William III 1700-1702, preserved in the State Paper Dept of Her Majesty’s Public Record Office; entry No 203, page 39, undated 1700, place of writing: Hampton Court: Ld Jersey to the Lords Justices of Ireland transmitting the petition to the King of Col. Walter Butler; SP 67/2, pp.324-326

[12] Ibid

[13] William Lynch Esq., A View of the Legal Institutions Honorary Hereditary Offices, and Feudal Baronies Established in Ireland During the Reign of Henry the Second, London, 1830, p285

[14] SP 34/35/1: An Act for the Relief of Walter Butler Junior Only Son and heir apparent of Col. Walter Butler of Mumphin in the County of Wexford, undated- Queen Anne Period- appears to have been written late November 1703

[15] Colonel Cavanagh, Clan Kavanagh in the Imperial Service, The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Sixth Series, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jun 30, 1922), Stable URL: www.jstor.org/stable/25513242, National Library of Australia 08/01/2012, p.44

[16] Carlingford Papers, Series III, Letters from Fracnis Taaffe 1670-1684, Yale University Library

[17] Public Records Office UK, SP34/35/1

[18] Ireland Parliament House of Commons Votes of the House of Commons in the Parliament began at Dublin on Tuesday the 21^st day of Sept in the second year of the reign of Queen Anne Anno Domini 1703. Dublin. 1703. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale. National Library of Australia 10 Mar 2010

Gale Document Number CB130477182

[19] Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1703-4, p566; Now SP 63/363 modern stamped folio 53 RH page 27 Nov Dublin Southwell to Nottingham

[20] CSP, Dom Anne, 1703-4, p241. Now SP 44/104 p. 388 Nottingham to Attorney General

[21] CSP, Dom. Anne,1703-4 [2048], SP63.364, f.90, pp.556-58 Southwell to Nottingham

[22] Thomas W.H. Fitzgerald in his book Ireland and Her People: A Library of Irish Biography, pub 1909, page 184, wrote “Pierce Butler Viscount Galmoy… served with distinction at the Boyne and Aughrim and was one of the signatories of the Treaty of Limerick. In August 1677 he took the degree of L.L. D. (viz. Doctor of Laws at Oxford under the Chancellorship of the Duke of Ormonde); under James II, he was Privy Councillor of Ireland, Lieutenant of Co Kilkenny, and Colonel of the Second Regiment of Horse. Etc.” Fitzgerald then lists Galmoy’s military achievements in the service of France.

[23] The O’Hara Family, The Boyne Water, pub Dublin 1825, page 288

[24] John Oldmixon, Memoirs of Ireland from the Restoration to the Present Times, pub London 1716, page 92-93-accounts describe acts of pack rape, and torture before ‘execution’, and defilement and mutilation of bodies following execution.

[25] Thomas Babington Macauley, The History of England from the Accession of James the Second, Volume 1, pub. E.H. Butler & Co, Philadelphia, 1861, page 59

[26] In March 1695, Galmoy married Henrietta fitzJames, the illegitimate daughter of James II and Arabella Churchill, sister to the Duke of Marlborough. Henrietta was widow of Henry Waldegrave, 1^st baron Waldegrave.

[27] SP 67/3, f.128

[28] Butler to Hedges, (petition dated 12 April 1704) PRO, SP 63/364 folio 169

[29] National Archives- SP 63/364, folios 164 to 170 inclusive. Butler’s letter to Hedges: folio 169

[30] Wikipedia- Sir Charles Hedges

[31] Letters Illustrative of the Reign of William III from 1696 to 1708 Addressed to Duke of Shrewsbury by James Vernon Esq Secretary of State, Ed by GPR James Esq, Volume III, pub London 1841, page187-188 (Google Books)

George Stepney was in the diplomatic service at various German courts. In 1702, sent to Vienna as envoy; in 1705 Prince Eugene requested Stepney’s withdrawal, but demand taken back at request of Marlborough; removed to the Hague in 1706.

[32] Clifford Leech, The Political “Disloyalty” of Thomas Southerne, in The Modern Language Review, Vol 28, No 4 (Oct., 1933), pp.421-430, pub. Modern Humanities Research Association.

[33] C. Leech, op.cit; ref Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1703-4, pp551, 551-3, 567 from Originals in PRO

[34] SP 34/3, f.197, 8/10 March 1704

[35] CSP, Dom: reign of Anne, II. 1703-1704; Entry No. 1704 [2073.2], page 566, date 9 Mar 1704, Nottingham to Southwell

[36] CSP, Dom: reign of Anne, II. 1703-1704; Entry No. 1704 [2089], page 572, date 16 Mar 1704, Lord Lieut. of Ire. To Nottingham

[37] CSP, Dom: Anne II; 1704 [2090], p.572, 16 Mar 1704

[38] Hugh Montgomery-Massingberd, Burkes Irish Family Records, pub London Uk Burkes Peerage 1976, p199 (thepeerage.com)

[39] John D’Alton, Illustrations Historical and Genealogical of King James’ Army List 1689, Volume I, Dublin 1855, p100. One of the conditions of the French King for supplying French troops and commanders was that James would exchange them with several Irish regiments. James did not hold a good opinion of Irish troops or officers fighting on Irish soil.

[40] The Tenth Report, Appendix, Part V, of the Manuscripts of the Marquess of Ormonde, The Earl of Fingall, the Corporations of Waterford, Galway etc., The Historical Manuscripts Commission 1885, p.126:

[41] Michael McNally, Battle of the Boyne 1690, Osprey Pub., Oxford UK, 2005, p48

[42] Matthew O’Conor, Military History of the Irish Nation, Ch VI: First Formation of the Irish Brigade in the Service of France, Dublin 1845, pp97-99

Ancestry of Butlers of County Wexford Ireland

Sunday 13 October 2013

Butlers of Co. Wexford- Ch.13: Walter Butler Junior of Munphin Pt.1- exile to France in 1690

WALTER BUTLER JUNIOR (1674-1725) of MUNPHIN, COUNTY WEXFORD, IRELAND

WALTER BUTLER JNR'S MILITARY CAREER IN THE SERVICE OF FRANCE

WALTER BUTLER SNR'S PETITIONS FOR HIS SON'S ATTAINDER TO BE REPEALED

An Act for the Relief of Walter Butler Junior Only Son and heir apparent of Col Walter Butler of Mumphin (sic Munphin) in the County of Wexford [17]

The Petition states: