o valet.
Ante prophanus erat locus hic quem dextra beavit
Ejus, et hinc pro se dicito quisquis Ave".

The next mention we find of this see is in a petition of the Archbishop
of Armagh, Octavian de Palatio, addressed to Henry VII. about the year
1487, in which he writes that, "the fruits, rents, and revenues, as well
spiritual as temporal (of Dromore), extend not above the sum of L40 of
the coin of this your land of Ireland, which is less by one-third than
the coin sterling; and that for the expense and poverty of the same, the
see is void and desolate, and almost extinct, these twenty winters past
and more, insomuch that none will own the said bishoprick or abide
thereupon".

Nevertheless, in that very year, 1487, George Brann was appointed to
this see by Pope Innocent VIII. He had lived for several years in Rome
as procurator of the Hospital of the Santo Spirito, and had also
proceeded to Ireland to establish a branch house of that institute. He
held the see till his translation to Elphin on the 18th of April, 1499.

The first bishop of Dromore whom we find commemorated in the sixteenth
century is _Galeatius_, whose death is registered in 1504. Of his
successor, John Baptist, we only know that he was appointed on June
12th, the same year. _Thaddeus_, a Franciscan friar, was next advanced
to the see on 30th April, 1511. He is commemorated in Archbishop
Cromer's register, as still ruling the see in 1518, and we find no other
bishop mentioned till the appointment of _Quintinus Cogleus_ (_i.e._ Con
MacCoughlin), of the order of St. Dominick, in the year 1536 (_Hib.
Dom._, p. 486). This bishop, however, seems to have held the see only
for a short time, for in the Consistorial Acts we soon after find the
following entry:--"An. 1539. Sua Sanctitas providit Ecclesiae Dromorensi
in Hibernia _de persona_ Rogerii".

Ten years later Arthur Magennis was chosen by Pope Paul III. to govern
the diocese of St. Colman. On the 10th of May, 1550, he surrendered his
bulls to the crown, and had in return "a pardon under the great seal for
having received the Pope's bull, and for other misdemeanours". (Reeves'
_Eccles. Antiq._, p. 308. V. Morrin, _Pat. Rolls_, i. p. 205).
Nevertheless, there can be but little doubt as to the orthodoxy of this
prelate. Even Cox (i. 288) attests his devotion to the Catholic cause.
He, moreover, specially names him as an instance of a _Catholic bishop_,
and adduces the fact of his being allowed by