Wood — The Court of Castle Chamber or Star Chamber of Ireland. 161 



and in one case — that of a man named Chamberlain — he was punished 

 not only for not going to church himself, but also for not compelling his wife 

 to go too. But James I, whose accession was hailed with joy by the Catholics, 

 soon showed that he was no advocate of toleration. He was resolved to 

 coerce the people into an acceptance of Protestant ceremonies, if not of 

 dogmas. By two proclamations, one of the 4th Jnly, 1605, and another of 

 the 16th October in the same year, he ordered all Jesuits and priests to leave 

 the kingdom and all people to attend divine service ; and by the latter of these 

 proclamations, he increased the penalty for non-compliance to " such further 

 punishment as may be lawfully inflicted upon the wilful contemners of His 

 Majesty's royal commands, proclamations, and prerogatives." Thus this latter 

 proclamation extended the Statute of Elizabeth by bringing the recusant, if 

 necessary, within the scope of the Castle Chamber jurisdiction. The humbler 

 people who refused to attend their parish churches he left to be presented by 

 the Grand Juries in the Court of King's Bench and at assizes. But the fines 

 there imposed under the Statute were not sufficient to force into compliance 

 the nobility and the more wealthy citizens. For them was reserved a special 

 use of his royal prerogative, which he had not employed in England. 

 Mandates or special King's Letters under the privy or broad seal were 

 addressed to the recusants by name, commanding their particular attendance 

 at church in the presence of the Deputy, or of the Presidents of the provinces 

 of Munster and Connaught, or of their respective councils, under the penalty, 

 in case of disobedience, of being punished by decree or censure of the Court 

 of Castle Chamber with heavy fines and imprisonment. To mention one 

 case, mandates were issued to sixteen chief aldermen and citizens of Dublin 

 to attend the Mayor to Christ Church and to present themselves before the 

 Lord Deputy and council there, and to hear divine service. They refused 

 and were fined £100 each and imprisoned. To evade the fines, they made 

 over their goods to their children, by deeds, but these were declared by the 

 Court of Castle Chamber to be void to bar the King's execution. The same 

 procedure was carried out in other cities, with this difference that in the 

 provinces of Munster and Connaught, the fines were inflicted at the Council 

 Table by the Lord President and Council. In the country districts the Act 

 could not well be carried out because most of the churches were not habitable, 

 and the New Testament and Book of Common Prayer in Irish had not yet 

 been prepared. 



Sir John Davys clearly showed the reason for this use of the prerogative. 

 He wrote 1 : " But if the wealthier sort have no heavier punishment than to 



1 Cal. State Papers (Ireland;, 16U3-6, p. 467. 



[25*] 



