very full powers and instructions to take as many settlers from Barbados as were willing to accompany him (ib. Nos. 656, 664, 687, &c.) At the same time, 18 Feb., he was created a baronet (ib. Dom.)
In June he arrived in Jamaica, and for the next seven years identified himself with the island. It was admitted that under his rule the colony made rapid advances in material prosperity; but it was alleged that he encouraged pirates, and that the wealth which flowed into the island was mainly the ill-gotten spoils of piracy, spent in filthy debauchery. Modyford's friends asserted, on the other hand, that while pirates were duly hanged, the buccaneers or privateers were honest fellows, who, though occasionally too convivial, rendered good service to the king and the colony, and their gains were not nearly so large as was reported. According to Modyford, the most 'intemperate' men on the island were the old army officers, 'who, from strict saints, were turned the most debauched devils.' 'The Spaniards,' he wrote, 'wondered much at the sickness of our people, until they knew of the strength of their drinks, but then wondered more that they were not all dead' (ib. America and West Indies, 16 Nov. 1665). It is quite certain that the deeds which rendered the name of buccaneer terrible and famous were performed under valid commissions from the governor in council, who, in the king's name, received a fifteenth of their prize-money (see Morgan, Sir Henry; ib. 28 June 1671). These commissions, Modyford argued, were rendered necessary by the aggressions of the Spaniards who had landed in Jamaica, had captured English vessels, and were preparing for hostilities on a grander scale. The king's instructions empowered him 'on extraordinary cases, by the council's advice, to use extraordinary remedies' (ib. June? 1671, No. 578; cf. also 1 March 1666, No. 1144, 14 Jan. 1667, No. 1383, 23 Aug. 1669, No. 103, &c.)
So long as the first Duke of Albemarle was living his great interest supported Modyford. But after Albemarle's death, in January 1669-70, in order to give effect to 'the treaty for establishing peace in America concluded at Madrid on 8 July 1670,' Modyford's commission was revoked in December, and Sir Thomas Lynch [q. v.], appointed to supersede him, was ordered to send him home under arrest (ib. Nos. 367, 405, 602), on the charge of ' making war and committing depredations and acts of hostility upon the subjects and territories of the King of Spain in America, contrary to his Majesty's express order and command.' In the middle of June Modyford received Lynch with 'abundance of civility,' but on 12 Aug. he was inveigled on board the Assistance frigate, and there told that he was to be sent home a prisoner. He was allowed to go to England in one of his own ships, though in charge of a guard (ib. Nos. 587-8, 604, 655). He arrived about the middle of November, and was committed to the Tower (ib. Nos. 653-4, 17 Nov. 1671). On 14 Aug. 1672 he was ordered to have the liberty of the Tower, but he seems to have been still a prisoner at the end of 1674. It is not improbable that he was released and went out to Jamaica with Sir Henry Morgan in 1675. He died at Jamaica, and was buried in the cathedral church at Spanish Town on 2 Sept. 1679.
Modyford married, about 1640, Elizabeth, daughter of Lewin Palmer of Devonshire. She died on 12 Nov. 1668—of, it is said, the plague, brought by Morgan from Portobello (The Present State of Jamaica, p. 40)—leaving a daughter, Elizabeth, and two sons, of whom Charles, the elder, predeceased his father. The younger, Thomas, succeeded to the baronetcy, which became extinct, with the third generation, in 1703 (Burke, Extinct Baronetcies).
[Calendars of State Papers, North America and West Indies; Addit. MSS. 12408, 27968; New History of Jamaica, 1740; Present State of Jamaica, 1683; Long's Hist, of Jamaica, 1774; Archer's Monumental Inscriptions of the British West Indies; Davis's Cavaliers and Roundheads of Barbadoes; Hatton Correspondence (Camd. Soc.), i. 56, 108.]
MOELES, BALDWIN or (d. 1100?). [See Baldwin.]
MOELMUD, DYFNWAL (fl. 500), Northern British prince, appears in the tenth-century genealogies of Harleian MS. 3859 (Cymmrodor, ix. 174) as a grandson of Coel Odebog. This is the sole reference to him which can be called historical. In later Welsh literature he plays a purely mythical part. He becomes the primitive legislator of the Britons, the deviser of all early British institutions. In this capacity he appears in the narrative of Geoffrey of Monmouth, who makes him the son of Cloten, king of Cornwall, and says that the laws drawn up by him were still in use among the English. Geoffrey's account is accepted by the compiler of the 'Venedotian Code,' who flourished about 1220; according to this writer, Hywel the Good, while altering greatly the old laws of Dyfnwal, left untouched the primitive land measurements (Ancient Laws of Wales, 1841 edit. i. 184). Dyfnwal is not mentioned in the two earlier sets of 'Historical Triads,' but is prominent in the third, having
