Page:Confiscation in Irish history.djvu/205

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
THE RESTORATION SETTLEMENT
193

But Petty kept a firm hold on the vast tracts he had acquired in Kerry and elsewhere. They duly passed on the death of Petty's sons, to his only daughter who married the head of one of the oldest Anglo-Norman families in Ireland, Thomas Fitzmaurice, twenty-first Lord of Kerry. Their descendant, the Marquis of Lansdowne, holds them to the present day. O'Sullivan Bere never recovered an acre.

As a final result of all petitions we find in the Act a number of clauses, often contradictory, restoring various persons. Some, such as Garret Moore of the Co. Mayo, and Colonel John Kelly of Skryne, were to be restored before reprisals; others, such as Lord Gormanston and Grace of Courtstown, only after the reprisal of those in possession. Some, such as Lords Mountgarrett and Mayo, were to be restored at once to their principal messuage and to such of their lands as were not in possession of any adventurer or soldier, and to the rest after reprisals. The son of Sir Thomas Sherlock was to recover his principal messuage and half his father's property at once; the rest after reprisals; Lord Dunsany was to get his castle and one-third of his lands before and the rest after reprisals.[1]

Arguments continued as to how best to provide reprisals. Each party put forward proposals. As the discussion proceeded gross frauds on the part of the adventurers were discovered which

  1. Many of those named above were to have been restored by the previous Act and by the King's declaration of Nov, 1660, but as yet had got nothing.