premacy. The obsequious Parliament voted L30,000 to the
Duke of Ormonde, whose career of duplicity was crowned with success. It
is almost amusing to read his biographer's account[505] of the favours
bestowed on him, and the laudations he bestows on his master for his
condescension in accepting them. Carte would have us believe that
Ormonde was a victim to his king and his country, and that the immense
sums of money he received did not nearly compensate him for his outlays.
Posterity will scarcely confirm the partiality of the biographer.

The Bill of Settlement was opposed by the Irish Catholics through their
counsel, but their claims were rejected and treated with contempt.
Charles had told his Parliament, on his restoration, that he expected
they would have a care of his honour and of the promise he had made.
This promise had been explicitly renewed by Ormonde for the King, before
he left for Breda; but the most solemn engagements were so regularly
violated when Irish affairs were concerned, that nothing else could have
been expected. A Court of Claims was at length established, to try the
cases of ejectment which had occurred during the Commonwealth; but this
excited so much indignation and alarm amongst the Protestants, that all
hope of justice was quickly at an end, and the time-serving Ormonde
closed the court. The grand occupation of each new reign, for the last
few centuries, appears to have been to undo what had been done in the
preceding reigns. An Act of Explanation was now passed, and a Protestant
militia raised, to satisfy that party. It was provided by the new Act
that the Protestants were, in the first place, and especially, to be
settled; that any doubt which arose should be decided in their favour;
and that no Papist, who, by the qualifications of the former Act, had
not been adjudged innocent should at any future time be reputed
innocent, or entitled to claim any lands or settlements. It will be
remembered that Ormonde had cut short the sittings of the court to
satisfy Protestant clamour; in consequence of this, more than 8,000
Catholic claimants were condemned to forfeit their estates, without even
the shadow of an inquiry, but with the pretence of having justice done
to them, or, as Leland has expressed it, "without the justice granted to
the vilest criminal--that of a fair and equal trial."[506]

Although it would seem to the ordinary observer that the Catholics had
been dealt with severely, the dom