Anglo-Celt
Published in Cavan, county Cavan
July 5,
1855
BIRTH.
June 28, at Tarbotstown, county Westmeath, the wife of James Arthur DEASE, Esq., of a daughter.
MARRIED
June 26, in Kilmore Cathedral, by the Right Hon. and Very Rev. Lord FITZGERALD and Vesey(sic), Dean of Kilmore, assisted by the Rev. Ralph HOPE, John W. HENRY, C.E., son of the late Robert HENRY, Esq., of Brookfield, county of Louth, to Charlottes, daughter of the late Major STAFFORD, of Tully, county of Cavan.
DIED.
June 5, at New York, Elizabeth, relict of the late Mr. Williams ADAMS, of Glassdromond, parish of Knockbride, county Cavan.
July 12, 1855
BIRTH.
July 5, at Warwick Terrace, London, the wife of John Brady, Esq., M.P., of a son, stillborn.
MARRIED.
July 5, at Westport, George S. BOURNS, Esq., of Rosport House, county Mayo, to Elizabeth HARTLEY, eldest daughter of the late Charles WALLACE, Esq., resident magistrate, formerly Lieutenant in the 40th Regiment.
July 19, 1855
BIRTH
July 5, at Dundrum, Mrs. J. YOUNG, Dewnshire Hotel, of a daughter.
DIED
On this day in Farnham street, Mrs. COYNE, mother of Bernard COYNE, Esq., M.D., V.R.C.S.I., of this town.
July 8, at Ballina, Jeannie, wife of Charles T. GILMOR, Esq., of Newport, Mayo, and daughter of the late M. WALSH, Esq., of Cootehill
CAVAN SUMMER ASSIZES
CROWN COURT
THURSDAY 13TH JULY
(Before Mr. Justice Ball.)
The following gentlemen were sworn on a Petty Jury:
Robert PRINGLE, William ROGERS, John YAW, James FEGAN, Arthur ELLIS, Peter BRADY, Francis RICHMOND, William CRANSTON, John O'NEILL, John CLEMENGER, George BIGGERS(?), and William NEY.
Isabella GALLAGHER for stealing a shawl and pair of boots at Munery, the property of Wm. CARMICHAEL, on 25th June.
Guilty -- To be imprisoned for four months and kept to hard labour.Patrick CARTY, Peter SHERIDAN, and Peter Kiernan, for riotously assembling and assaulting John KEMP and Richard KEMP on 5th July inst.
Mr. Edward M'GAURAN, Solicitor, moved a postponement of the trial on the affidavit of one of the prisoners, to the effect that, having been arrested only on the 6th instant, they are unprepared for trial at the present assizes, nor could they procure the attendance of Francis DOYLE, a most material witness, for this day.
The application was granted, and the prisoners discharged, on entering into fresh recognizances.
James CONNOLLY for assaulting and having carnal knowledge of Kitty FITZPATRICK, a child, under five years of age.
Mary Anne FITZPATRICK, the child's mother, examined by Mr. SMYLY, Q.C., proved that the prisoner was lodging in her house in Belturbet, on 17th March last. Francis RORKE and his wife were sleeping there too. She (RORKE) is sister to prisoner. John M'GLADE and wife slept in another bed in same room, and in a third bed the prisoner and his mother slept. The child, Kitty, slept usually with witness and her father, but the latter being unwell, she did not sleep with them that night, but was put to sleep in the bed with prisoner and his mother. About nine o'clock prisoner went to bed ; his mother stopt(sic) up some time attending witness's husband. RORKE and his wife were in bed before CONNOLLY, and so were M'GLADE and his wife. Kitty was undressed and put into bed with prisoner at about half past nine, and she slept in the same bed with prisoner the next night also. Prisoner's mother did not go to bed either nights until half past eleven. On the night of the 19th the child slept with RORKE and his wife. On the following morning witness found the child ailing, and showed her state to Mrs. RORKE and Mrs. M'GLADE, and on the next day she brought her to Dr. WADE, who attended the child for some time. The child was never taught her catechism, but merely knows how to say her prayers. There were no boys in the house before prisoner came to lodge there.
Francis RORKE, a member of the Cavan Militia, examined by Mr. HENDERSON, Q.C. -- Lodged in Mrs. FITZPATRICK'S with his wife on St. Patrick's night. Witness went to be shortly after nine o'clock. James CONNOLLY slept in the room with witness. Was not awake when the child was put to bed, but saw her in bed the next morning. The prisoner was in bed alone with her at six o'clock that morning. Does not recollect seeing her sleeping with the prisoner any other night. She slept with witness and his wife one night ; she made no complaint of any kind on that occasion, nothing that could injure her occurred on that night. Oliver BOURNES and some five or six boys slept in the house before prisoner came to lodge there. Knows that it was before and not after, because witness heard the boys speaking of going to the fair of Ballyconnell on Patrick's day.
Dr. WADE examined by Mr. SMYLY -- Examined the child (describes how she was affected). Examined the prisoner's person in a few days afterwards ; he was affected in the same way but more decidedly than the child. Is as certain as a man can be of the boy's affection.
Dr. ROE examined by Mr. HENDERSON -- Examined the boy. Has no recollection of the result, but if he did not prescribe for the boy, he surely was not affected in the manner described by Dr. WADE.
His Lordship referred the case to the jury, stating that there was in the case no more than a strong suspicion, a remark in which the Crown joined.
The jury acquitted the prisoner.
There was no other case of importance brought before his Lordship, who despatched the Crown business in the course of a very few hours.
RECORD COURT
Friday, July 13
(Before the Hon. Baron PENNEFATHER.)
SWANZY v. THOMPSON
Mr. CARSON opened the pleadings. It was an action for 287£ 12s. 0d. due to plaintiff for services done for the defendant, and at his instance. The issue was, whether there were any such services rendered at defendant's instance.
Mr. R. JOHNSTON stated the case. He said his client was Clerk of the Crown in the county, and a solicitor of great eminence, who, surely, would not come into this court as plaintiff in an action which he was not well able to substantiate. The jurors knew, every man In Court knew, how well calculated Mr. SWANZY was from his habits and position, to render services such as should meet the sanction of a proposed Railway Company. The learned gentleman then stated the case, as it came out in evidence, contending that the request made to his client by the deputation, who came from Belfast to Cavan in June, 1853, was a retaining of him, and that Mr. THOMPSON's suggestion to Mr. HAGUE, of some 230£ or 300£ for Mr. SWANZY, was an approval of this retainer. Mr. JOHNSTON concluded by stating, that if the defendant deemed Mr. SWANZY not to be entitled to so much as he claimed, he should have paid into court whatever he believed to be fair, and left him to abide the issues, but he paid in nothing, made no offer of any kind, and now to his own risk be it.
We are sorry that we cannot give the learned gentleman's speech in extenso, our reporter having been engaged in the Crown Court, while it was being delivered. We understand that a reporter from the Daily Express was present at the time, but he has not thought proper to publish it.
W. HAGUE, Esq., examined by Mr. LOWRY - Recollects a railway being contemplated to Cavan from Armagh to Clones. Some Belfast gentlemen came here about that project. Mr. THOMPSON was here on one occasion. Cannot say that it was in June, 1853. Thinks it was in 1853. Does not remember who was with him. It is possible Major ANKETEL was. Might have had a communication with Mr. A on the occasion. Recollects a meeting held in Cavan, at which Mr. Theophilus THOMPSON presided. Does not know whether Mr. THOMPSON of Belfast attended that meeting. Made no application to Mr. SWANZY at the instance of Mr. THOMPSON or the gentleman who accompanied him. Does not recollect whether Mr. SWANZY was present at that meeting, but thinks he attended every meeting. Mr. DOLLING, Major ANKETEL, and Mr. LANKTREE formed a deputation to the Grand Jury at an assizes in Cavan. Witness went to Belfast with Dr. ROE and Mr. SWANZY to attend a meeting there. Mr. SWANZY applied to be joined as a solicitor with Mr. BATES in the railway scheme. Witness understood the committee to say that as soon as a Board of Directors was appointed Mr. SWANZY would be compensated for his services, or have his claims laid before them. Had a conversation himself with Mr. THOMPSON immediately after the meeting in Belfast. Mr. THOMPSON asked would 200£ or 300£ satisfy Mr. SWANZY. Witness said he thought 300£ would. Had no communication with Mr. THOMPSON or Mr. BATES as to Mr. SWANZY's going to London. Witness went to London in Summer, 1854. Mr. W. THOMPSON, of the Ulster Bank, went with him. Mr. SWANZY came to London after witness, who advised him to go there, but had no authority to direct him to it. The company had a committee in London, of which Mr. THOMPSON was chairman, as he understood. Was present in London when an offer of 3 guineas a day during his stay in London was made to Mr. SWANZY. He remained a week there. Mr. THOMPSON and two or three others of the committee made the offer, but it was a conditional one, that he should have no further claim on the company. The Dundalk and Enniskillen Company got up an opposition scheme. They held a meeting in Cootehill. Witness asked Mr. SWANZY to go there and advocate the Belfast line, but he had no directions to do so. Wrote to Mr. THOMPSON about Mr. SWANZY's services, and got an answer from Mr. BATES to that effect, that Mr. SWANZY's case would be considered and justice done him. Mr. SWANZY acted generally and beneficially for the Belfast Company, and was their best friend here.
Cross-examined by Mr. MAJOR, Q.C. - In Mr. BATES' letter to witness about going to London, there was no word of bringing over Mr. SWANZY. Mr. SWANZY went to Belfast to prefer whatever claims he had. Thinks the Belfast and West of Ireland Company had not them been formed. Cannot specify what services Mr. SWANZY rendered to the company, but he is sure he had claims. He stated that he attended several meetings at his own expense, and had done other things which cost him a great deal of money. Thinks the Belfast and West of Ireland Company got the benefit of all Mr. SWANZY's services. Mr. SWANZY was not asked by the company to go to London. Witness advised him to go. Mr. WALLACE was solicitor to a former company. Never heard Mr. SWANZY say he was a terrible fellow, nor knew him to have an eye on a share of Mr. WALLACE's profits as well as Mr. BATES's. Cannot say that all Mr. SWANZY's services were a mere speculation, having in view a share in the solicitorship to the company.
To a Juror - Mr. SWANZY claimed no particular sum at the meeting in Belfast; it was in a private conversation that Mr. THOMPSON inquired whether 200£ or 300£ would satisfy Mr. SWANZY. That gentleman had first made his claim for services rendered, and this in the presence of Mr. THOMPSON.
Cross-examination resumed - Thinks Mr. THOMPSON stated at the meeting, and from the chair, that Mr. SWANZY might not expect to be remunerated for any claims he might have had on any former company. Did not hear Mr. THOMPSON say that the claims MR. SWANZY had put forward at the meeting were claims upon another company.
William THOMPSON, Esq., examined by Mr. CARSON - Was Manger of the Ulster Bank of Cavan in 1853. Remembers the Belfast and West of Ireland Railway Company being contemplated that year. A meeting was held in Cavan at which a deputation from Belfast attended. Mr. LANKTREE and Mr. THOMPSON, he believes, were here. Mr. THOMPSON was here at some meeting, some other gentleman came with him; it was on matters relative to the railway they came. Does not recollect whether he had any conversation with any deputation relative to Mr. SWANZY, in Mr. THOMPSON's presence. Was in London in 1854, Mr. SWANZY was there too. He made claims, for services rendered, through witness and Mr. HAGUE; the claims were opposed by some members of the committee and Mr. BATES. Cannot say whether any offer was made to Mr. SWANZY by the committee; knows that Mr. SWANZY was very active in supporting the company.
Cross-examined by Mr. BROOKE, Q.C. - Witness was very active himself in the matter of the railway. Mr. SWANZY attended the meeting and made a speech there. On several occasions he complained of his services being unrequited by former companies. Mr. SWANZY was not examined by the committee in London' his object in going to London was to have his claims settled. Knows not what these claims were.
George ROE, Esq., M.D., examined by Mr. LOWRY - Was a shareholder in the Belfast and West of Ireland Railway; attended a public meeting in Belfast, in September, 1853; Mr. THOMPSON was chairman then; Mr. SWANZY applied to have his claims settled; these involved claims on former companies but nothing was determined upon the matter, except a feeling of acknowledgement of the services he had rendered. Is quite sure that Mr. SWANZY rendered active service to the Belfast and West of Ireland Company.
To a Juror - It was not Mr. SWANZY that asked witness to take shares in the line.
Cross-examined by Mr. M'CAUSLAND - Is sorry to say he is a shareholder. Mr. LANKTREE induced him to take the shares; witness had taken his shares previous to the meeting in Belfast; he was summoned as a shareholder. Mr. SWANZY said not a word at that meeting about being made joint solicitor, or sharing in the profits; nor did he ever say anything of such import to witness at any time.
Samuel SWANZY, Esq., examined by Mr. CARSON - Is plaintiff in this action; a line from Belfast to Cavan was contemplated in 1853; a meeting was held in Cavan at which witness attended; a deputation from Belfast was present; does not know whether Mr. THOMPSON was one of them. The meeting in Cavan was held in June 1853; the next meeting he attended was held in Belfast, in September, 1853. After the proceedings had terminated witness put in his claims for compensation, as he believed himself retained previous to the meeting in Cavan. An opposite line was projected; the supporters of it held a meeting in Cootehill, in December, 1853, which witness attended, and where he argued against the Dundalk and Enniskillen line. It was Mr. HAGUE that directed him to go there. Witness went to London in spring, 1854; an error in the engineering having enterfered (sic) with the project of the Belfast company, a petition to waive standing orders was got up in Cavan, and witness went over to see everything right about it. Had a conversation with Mr. THOMPSON in London, and was told that his claims would be considered. He was afterwards offered three guineas a day during the time the committee sat, if he waived all claims on the company.
Cross-examined by Mr. MAJOR Q.C. - Went over in spring, 1854 to London without any direction, but believing himself engaged in the matter; went to London in May, 1854, to attend the Parliamentary Committee, having documents which he thought of considerable value to produce; witness was not directed positively to go this time either; does not recollect ever having threatened to oppose the company, if he was not paid. Believes but for his being involved in the Belfast line, he would have been engaged by the other company. At the time of his appearing in Belfast he had no services but prospective ones to make claims for. He wanted either to have a share in the solicitorship, or to be compensated for his trouble in discussing the matter, inducing people to take shares, &c., &c., cannot undertake to name the persons whom he induced to take the shares. Too many took shares, but Mr. BATES got the large one, 26,000 pounds.
To a Juror - Mr. HAGUE told witness that he was to get two or three hundred pounds.
To another Juror - Did not attend the first meeting in Cavan until he was solicited to go there; thinks it was Mr. LANKTREE, in company with Mr. William JOHNSTON, who engaged him to go.
The case for the plaintiff closed here.
Mr. MAJOR claimed a non-suit. The issue was whether -
Court - Oh! I will take a note of your application.
Mr. MAJOR - Then gentlemen of the jury I have to address you in a most unpleasant case. This is an extraordinary action; it is a novel action, and the more so, as being brought by one holding a high position in the county, officially and professionally, and against one of high station in Belfast, who would not appear before you unless he had good grounds to rest upon. Mr. THOMPSON is one of the first merchants in Belfast, and connected with the banks there; such a one must have well founded grounds of denying all retainer or he would not come to deny it; but he feels it his duty, confided in, as he was, by a large number of men, whom he induced to take shares in a certain undertaking, to resist this gross attempt to obtain remuneration for services that were never rendered, and that Mr. SWANZY rendered no services to the company with which Mr. THOMPSON was concerned, I will show under his own hand. I asked Mr. SWANZY what services he rendered. Were they professional? There were none such. But he induced people to subscribe for shares. Was it fitting in one holding his high position to run about the county spurring men to take shares from a company only in its infancy. Should he have gone to London uninvited, and then ask pecuniary compensation? His sole object was to obtain a share in the solicitorship of the company. Is there any evidence of services rendered from Mr. SWANZY himself, though he was brought up the last witness, while in honest cases the plaintiff is always the first produced. Just let me read for you his bill of particular. Attending meeting in Cavan; 'Inducing and procuring persons to take shares.' Whom did he induce? He cannot name one, and yet he claims 50£ for this service. "Attending meeting in Belfast." What! Is it the meting to which he went to prefer his own claims? It was sworn that such was his object in attending it, and yet he modestly asks for 25£, stating that he went there for "like purposes," that is to "induce and procure persons to take shares." Next for attending the meeting in Cootehill, for "like purposes," he asks you to give 12£, 12s. Was it not Mr. SWANZY's ardent zeal for the solicitorship that sent him about on these errands? He goes to London uninvited, was not examined as a witness, and asks for his visit only 100£, and for general superintendence of defendants interests, and procuring signatures to petitions, from June, 1853 to May, 1854, he asks a similar sum. - Gentlemen, from 1851 there were projects afloat in the counties of Cavan, Monaghan, Armagh, and Westmeath to effect junctions with the Ulster Railway. The Midland Great Western Railway Company desired to extend their line to Cavan, and efforts were made by them to promote this object. Mr. SWANZY was ardent in their behalf, and they ended by treating him abominably. In the latter-end of 1852, they succeeded in obtaining a bill, enabling them to connect their line with Cavan, and a project to unite lines was immediately conceived by the Ulster Company, by making an extension from Armagh to Cavan. But that project was only conceived for at a meeting held in Belfast, in September 1852 the shareholders declared against and repudiated it. It dropped then, but out of it arose another association - the Belfast and West of Ireland Junction Company. To this Mr. SWANZY never did any service. He made speeches, but he never got a shareholder, the only way of serving a company. This project progressed. Shareholders were got, principally in Belfast, and some few in Monaghan. The meeting in Cavan was the first opening out of the speculation in this county, and from that time Mr. SWANZY never served it was the assent of Mr. THOMPSON. An attempt was made by the company to get rid of the standing orders in 1852, but they were unsuccessfull (sic), and the matter was protracted to 1854, when the project came before Parliament, and was rejected. Soon after a compromise was come to between the opposite companies, by means of it the Dundalk and Enniskillen Companies got their bill, and an end was put to Mr. THOMPSON's line, which was not involved in any proceeding or subsequent projects. But Mr. SWANZY most ingeniously wishes to make it pay for services alleged to be rendered to its predecessors, and this I will show you from the letters of that gentleman, which I must take the liberty of reading for you - (The learned Counsel then read a number of long letters, upon which he commented) - On the 13th of Apl(sic), 1852, 9 months before any attempt was made to form the Belfast and West of Ireland Company, he writes to Mr. ANKETELL(sic) that Colonel CLEMENTS cannot go to London in consequence of bad health, and, there is not another man, who would go, in this "wretched county." He could not go himself unless he was undemnified (sic), and he hardly hoped that, the people could be induced to do this for him. Sir J. YOUNA E (? - cannot read the entire name - the copy is hard to read) cannot be trusted (a laugh), and as for Mr. MAXWELL, he was a mere cypher, he had no head (roars of laughter). If he could go himself it would do well, as he could represent the town of Cavan, being chairman of the town commissioners. How could the House of Commons resist that idea; the great chairman of the Cavan commissioners in his dignity before them. Surely, they should yield to the pressure (great laughter). On the 4th of May 1852, still previous to the formation of Mr. THOMPSON's Company, he again writes to Mr. ANKETELL stating that his opinion; that the Company - the Armagh and Cavan Company, not the Belfast and West of Ireland -- should send him to parliament in aid of their project. He becomes confidential, and says, "entre nous I am to direct evidence for the Mullingar people in London. Would you wish to be summoned as a witness?" And then how careful he is to provide for the comforts of the visit. "Could we bring our agreeable friend MORPHY," he asks, (a laugh) but here his ruling idea peeps out again, "are there, Mr. SWANZY inquires, any crumbs likely to fall at the Monaghan election?" (much laughter). Anon he shows himself a statesman and a patriot. "BUTT is returned for Harwich, it would be pleasant to put in DOLLING and make a party." This was not done, and yet the Chairman of Cavan town Commissioners willed it. But all this pleasant scheme was frustrated for on the 13th of May, 1852, Mr. SWANZY again writes to Mr. ANKETELL. "A great change has occurred in relation to my connexion(sic) with the Midland Great Western Company. A few days ago I was asked to procure witnesses, and name my terms, I replied that, I preferred leaving the latter to themselves. The solicitor, however, for some cause, has interfered to get rid of me." To get rid of Mr. SWANZY, is it possible? Of the chairman of the town commissioners? No, it could not be. But he continues, "I was this day told I need go to no more trouble. Must I act in opposition to them? I feel a difficulty in doing so, for any adverse step of mine might injure the proposed line from Armagh to Cavan." See his cleverness, he is no sooner done with one Company than he strives to put himself upon another and asks,"Is there any hope of an understanding with Hugh WALLACE." He, gentlemen, was solicitor to the Armagh and Cavan project, which, was not entertained by the shareholders, as I told you before. I have still some letters to read, I must beg your pardon.
Court - Oh! Go on; they are so amusing.
Mr. BROOKE - They are, my lord, and pertinent to the matter as I will show. On the 15th May, 1852, he writes again to Mr. ANKETELL, complaining that the Mullingar Company had thrown him up by the rascally advice of their solicitor, and that a skipjack and buffoon had gone to London in the matter, who, though he would contrive to get sitting on the Grand Jury in his capacity of an agent, had not an acre of ground in the county (roars of laughter) - he, the learned counsel, did not say, who, the "skipjack" was, perhaps, some of the jury could guess - but he could upset their scheme, and had no obligation of honour or duty, to prevent him from doing so; but, he refrained from using his power, lest it would injure the Belfast scheme. And then, gentlemen, he answers an objection of Mr. WALLACE that, there could not be two solicitors to the bill, by saying that, two could share in the profits. As shrewed(sic), remark this, and a significant one., (transcriber's note: this must be 'A shrewd remark this, and a significant one.') He concludes by leaving the whole matter to this friend, whom, not alone a sense of justice, but, a generous heart will influence. Gentlemen, Mr. ANKETELL was just and generous, and he is the man, whom Mr. SWANZY, as we shall see afterwards, threatened with this very action. I have now to treat of the Company, represented by Mr. THOMPSON. It was formed in 1853, and Mr. SWANZY endeavoured to obtain from Mr. THOMPSON his approval of whatever services he might render. Accordingly, in the end of '53 he writes to Mr. THOMPSON in answer to a letter from that gentleman, desiring him to specify the services for which he claimed compensation, that in June, 1851, it occurred to him, that a line connecting Belfast and Galway would be important to the country generally, and conferred with Mr. CLEMENS, as to the means of carrying out this project. He got up a requisition for a meeting and prepared resolutions for it, and got them moved and seconded by Lord FARNHAM and other gentlemen, and organized a committee and arranged, and attended (?) weekly meeting, and got up another county meeting in December, 1852, and in the following spring, obtained the sanction of the Grand Jury on behalf of the project. He hoped to be connected professionally with the railway, of which he was the originator(sic). Gentlemen, surely none of the services he specifies affected Mr. THOMPSON's Company, and yet from it he seeks remunneration(sic) for them. This letter was dated 17th of November, and on the 26th of the same month he again writes to Mr. THOMPSON requesting an answer, and stating that it was time that some understanding should be come to. He refers to a meeting, to be held in Cootehill, and inquires what is to be done regarding it? On the second day afterwards Mr. THOMPSON writes to him that he should confine his claims, if any, to work done for the Belfast and West of Ireland Company, that he had stated so to him before, as they had no funds belonging to any preceeding company. On the 13th of December Mr. SWANZY again addressed Mr. THOMPSON, stating that he could see no reason for distinguishing between the companies, as services rendered to one were available to the others. He was entitled, he said, to consideration for originating a project so important for Belfast, and alluded to the promise made to Mr. HAGUE of two or three hundreds for him, and ends by stating what he had done in Cootehill, not referring to the meeting in Cavan, nor making any claim for going to Belfast. If he then thought he had any such claim, he would surely have urged it; his silence about it is proof that it had not then even an imaginary existence. On the 17th of that month, Mr. THOMPSON wrote to him that he had referred his letters to the board, and that, for himself, he would be no party to paying any one who had not rendered services to their own company, and this under written direction. He desires him to tell Mr. HAGUE that he never mentioned three hundred pounds, or a single shilling, as being deserved by Mr. SWANZY, and requests that any future letters would be addressed to the Secretary, Mr. VANCE. Gentlemen, his own patience was exhausted; he was tired of Mr. SWANZY, and he wanted to get rid of him. Having written the letter which a businessman would write, having denied the matter referred to by Mr. HAGUE at the first communication of it to him, he casts aside Mr. SWANZY and cuts his acquaintance. Gentlemen, has not what I have read for you proved that your clerk of the Crown was striving to force himself upon the company, having in view the solicitorship, from which he was repudiated by Mr. BATES, as by Mr. WALLACE and Mr. KIRWAN(?) before him? I thought I had done with letters, but Mr. BATES puts one into my hand and insists upon my reading it. It is dated 28th July, 1854, and addressed by Mr. SWANZY to Major ANKETEL. He states that he has got a direct refusal of compensation from Mr. John BATES, and proceeds, "This man gives as a pretence for the injustice that I threatened to oppose his bill. If I did so I got ample cause, but I never thought of such a thing. Your failure was owing to the non-production of the documentary evidence in my possession, the production of which was rejected by Mr. BATES. It was the more necessary, and Lord FARNHAM did not support either, but an unworthy motive of ousting my claims actuated BATES in refusing the documents. Strange it is, that people in Belfast should so worship this frightful looking man (roars of laughter) in whom genius, or justice, or ability, or exalted idea could never have existence. (prolonged laughter) He concludes by asking will the project drop or will it be revived? Still an eye to business. On the 15th of November, 1852, he writes to Major ANKETELL, his "my dear sir," him of the generous heart, and addressing him as "Sir," tells him that under advice of counsel he was about proceeding against him and Mr. THOMPSON for his services, and, as he wished to save his old friend from having a law process thrust upon him by a bailiff, he asked him to name his solicitor, and the document would be left with him. Gentlemen, Mr. ANKETELL was never connected with the Belfast and West of Ireland Company, and, if he was liable to Mr. SWANZY, they could not be. My Lord, in conclusion I have only a few observations to make upon this amusing case. How could Mr. SWANZY have upon his mind in '54 an impression of being retained professionally, when he was told ion '53 that every servant of the company should act under written orders. Where was the retainer at any time by Mr. THOMPSON? There is none, and we ought to have a non suit, for the issue is whether the defendant retained or requested plaintiff to do the work alleged in the bill of particulars. Gentlemen, I now leave the case in your hands, satisfied that your verdict will be for the defendant, my client.
Mr. THOMPSON examined by Mr. BROOKE, Q.C. - Is the defendant; the Belfast and West of Ireland Company was projected in 1853; recollects Mr. WALLACE's project. In September, 1852, the Ulster shareholders determined against it' heard of the Mullingar and Cavan railway; thinks they got a bill in '52. After these came the project in which witness was concerned. It had no connexion or no funds in or from one scheme or the other; witness was on the provisional committee of Mr. WALLACE's company, but without his own consent; heard of the meeting in Cavan in June, 1853; was not present at it; was here this time two years, explaining the views of the company to the grand jury; witness came without any deputation; never had a conversation with Mr. SWANZY in his life, except the meeting in Belfast, at which he presided. Never retained Mr. SWANZY. There was a meeting in Belfast, in September, 1853, at which Mr. SWANZY attended; not by witness's request. He made a speech, showing that he held the county of Cavan in his hand, and would not excite it unless he was compensated for services rendered to the other companies. Witness publicly stated that they had nothing to do with the companies, which he said he served. Did not propose to give to Mr. HAGUE 300£ for Mr. SWANZY's services. Wrote to Mr. SWANZY to put his claims in writing. Got an answer in which claims on other companies were mentioned. Wrote the letter of the 14th December. Mr. SWANZY wrote to get a share in the profits of the solicitorship. That letter witness never answered, but referred to Mr. BATES. Mr. SWANZY was not retained to attend any meeting, or to go to London. The proposition to give Mr. SWANZY three guineas a day during the sitting of the committee never emanated from witness, and thinks it never came before the council at all.
Cross-examined by Mr. Robert JOHNSTON - Was anxious for the success of the project of the Belfast and Western Railway. Would have paid Mr. SWANZY for any reasonable services he rendered. Mr. SWANZY's attending meetings, and explaining the advantages of the line would forward the interests of it. Had no communication with Mr. SWANZY as to the Cootehill meeting. Got a letter from him stating that he attended it, and he replied that being from home when the letter came he could not reply to it. Does not remember having Mr. SWANZY's services at the Cavan meeting reported to him. Heard from Mr. SWANZY himself of his activity at Cootehill, but does not know whether any other person reported upon it to him. Got a newspaper report of it. Thought Mr. SWANZY's duty, as a gentleman in the county, to attend such meetings without requiring compensation. Mr. BATES might do it. He attends hundreds of meetings gratuitously. Even if Mr. SWANZY held the whole of Cavan in his hands he would not give a shilling to secure his services. It was at Belfast he gave reason for believing that he had so vast an influence. If he had given a written authority for doing so he would believe that going to London, and attending meetings, were services for which compensation should be given.
To the Court - Was quite aware, when he wrote the letter of the 17th November, that he had given no authority to render any services.
Court - What services did you therein desire him to specify.
Witness - I was not always in the chair, and instructions might be given in my absence to Mr. SWANZY. I wished to know if there were any.
Mr. LANKTREE examined by Mr. M'CAUSLAND - Was a member of the committee of the Belfast and West of Ireland Railway; attended as one of a deputation in 1853 to see what support we would get. Mr. THOMPSON was not here. Saw Mr. SWANZY then, had a conversation with him and Mr. ANKETELL. He wished a guarantee for remuneration for his services for the future. Witness said he had no authority to make any arrangement, but referred him to Mr. BATES, Mr. SWANZY wished to participate in the professional emoluments, but witness told him he could not treat on the subject.
Cross-examined by Mr. LOWRY - Does not recollect calling on Mr. HAGUE to procure Mr. SWANZY's assistance; it may be that he did. Knows Mr. William THOMPSON; does not recollect asking him to bring over Mr. SWANZY in favour of the project. Spoke to Mr. BATES of Mr. SWANZY's desire to share in the professional profits; told him that Mr. SWANZY was very friendly and had rendered services. Was in London, but knows of no offer being made to Mr. SWANZY there.
John BATES examined by Mr. MAJOR - Is the frightful looking man alluded to by Mr. SWANZY. Was solicitor to the company; never authorized Mr. SWANZY to do anything; saw him in London; did not invite him there; made a proposition to him in London, where his appearance created considerable surprise, to the effect that while the company did not recognize any claims of his, he would advise them to allow him what they would allow to any professional man leaving Cavan, if he waived all claims and left himself in the hands of the council, to be examined or not, as they thought proper. Did not mention any sum; never spoke of three guineas. He was to get what any other professional man called over would get, so much a day and traveling expenses.
Cross-examined by Mr. CARSON - What he offered to Mr. SWANZY was what would be paid to any other professional man brought over as a witness. Did not think at the time that Mr. SWANZY had a claim for 64 (?6d) (?64). They wanted to get rid of him, because they believed him to be a dangerous man, and one who threatened to give evidence on behalf of the opposition party, and was capable of doing it. Would consider himself bound as a Cavan man to give his services gratuitously. As a Belfast man he was interested too, but he got something to console him. The solicitors' bill came to some 5,000£. Never said that Mr. SWANZY had any just claim. Wrote a letter on the 27th April, 1854, stating that Mr. SWANZY's claims would be considered, and justice done to him, but at the time did not believe that there were any such services to be paid for.
This closed the evidence for the defence.
Mr. BROOK, Q.C., rose and said that he had now a right to comment on that evidence, but he was willing to cede it, if Mr. LOWRY would also cede his right of reply. It was now late, and the case had taken up much time.
Mr. LOWRY agreed to this.
His Lordship then proceeded to address the jury. He hoped the case would not suffer from the loss of the speeches of Mr. BROOKE (sic) and Mr. LOWRY, and that the jury would bear well with the mortification which there must be in being deprived of the delight of listening to their eloquence. He considered the case a serious one; on the one hand the Clerk of the Crown in the county, and an attorney of eminence puts forward a claim for compensation against an eminent merchant of Belfast, on the other, and the question of determining rights between such as these must be a serious one. The action is for work and labour done at the instance of the defendant, and the jury must be satisfied before they give in their verdict for the plaintiff that these services were rendered, and rendered in consequence of a legitimate retainer. It is admitted that the defendant did not retain anyone in the case, professionally or otherwise, as a private transaction. He acted, where he acted at all, in a public capacity, and situated as she(sic) (transcriber's note - I suppose this should be 'he') was, he may find himself bound in his individual capacity for acts done in his public character. It appears that certain Railway Companies were formed before 1853, that Mr. SWANZY was a good deal occupied about them, that he did services, as he thought, to them which were not requited, and he is of opinion that he was ill-used by both, or by one at least. As a recompense for this he might wish a third to make good his losses; but if such a thought occurred to him, they (the jury) ought not to put the saddle on the wrong horse, nor invest the Belfast and West of Ireland Company with the responsibility of others. You, gentlemen, are to inquire whether, and how far, services were rendered to Mr. THOMPSON, not to Mr. KIRWAN or to Mr. WALLACE. The Belfast and West of Ireland Company originated in 1853, not before, and the first evidence we have of its existence is the coming here of two gentlemen from Belfast, for the purpose of conciliating the inhabitants of Cavan. Mr. SWANZY attended a meeting merely, he alleges, at their desire, and subsequently did other services which were assented to by Mr. THOMPSON, as representing the Belfast and West of Ireland Company. You have in the first place to consider whether any services were rendered at Cavan in June. Mr. SWANZY claims a sum of fifty pounds for procuring subscribers to the undertaking. He was examined himself and he did not mention one whom he procured, but you will consider whether merely attending the meeting was a service to be requited. The next transaction is the meeting at Belfast, at which Mr. THOMPSON presided and Mr. SWANZY attended, and made claims for compensation for his services. It would appear that he had a double object in view from the beginning, to participate in the profits of future transactions, and be paid for what was done. As far as the first was concerned, the defendant is exempt from every claim, as it must not affect him but his solicitor, Mr. BATES. As to the second he appeared in Belfast, where he made claims for services rendered elsewhere. You are to judge yourselves in the matter, but as far as I can recollect, neither the evidence of Mr. SWANZY himself nor in his letter to Mr. THOMPSON is there any distinct statement made by him of his services, save so far as attending the meeting at Cavan was concerned. At that meeting Mr. THOMPSON, having said that Mr. SWANZY was not to be requited for services done elsewhere, afterwards asked Mr. HAGUE would two or three hundred pounds satisfy Mr. SWANZY? It struck me, and some of you, I believe, that this amounted to an admission of services rendered by Mr. SWANZY, and for which Mr. THOMPSON considered himself liable; but the thing would seem capable of explanation. Mr. THOMPSON does not think he used the words, but he might have said something to Mr. HAGUE which he misconceived. Considering the position of things at the time and matters as they came out subsequently, you are to consider whether the construction put upon them by the plaintiff can be made good. We have some letters to direct us. On the 17th November, Mr. THOMPSON writes to Mr. SWANZY requiring him to state the particulars of the services done for the company. Mr. THOMPSON ___ending (? - sorry, can't read it) that if any services were authoritatively rendered they ought to be paid for, but, if this is the fair construction, why did not plaintiff state precisely in writing what these services were? Though called up to do this we have no evidence that he did it. Then comes the meeting at Cootehill, in the month of December, 1853, which Mr. SWANZY attended. As far as it is seen his object was to oppose the other company, and you will judge whether in attending it he did such service. It is said he had no authority to attend there; it does not appear that he had any in writing, but such a one is not necessary; the relation of attorney and client, of master and servant, may exist without writing, and though it might have been more prudent to insist on a written authority, this should have been stated at the time, and not relied upon afterwards. What took place in June, previous to the meeting in Cavan, might have impressed Mr. SWANZY with a belief that he was authorized to act for the company, and you will judge whether the course taken by Mr. THOMSON(sic) in Belfast was calculated to put an end to any such feeling. If the gentlemen who came to Cavan in June gave Mr. SWANZY to understand that he might act in furtherance of the ends of the company and expect to be paid for it, I look upon it as clear that the acts of these gentlemen were recognized at the meeting in Belfast, otherwise the contrary would have been made known openly and distinctly. As to the meeting at Cootehill, you must consider whether Mr. SWANZY attended under any impression of authority given by the gentlemen who came to Cavan. Next in order of time is the meeting which was held in London. The committee of the company were attending a meeting of the House of Commons, and Mr. SWANZY thought it right to go over and tender his services. So far as appears from the evidence, he was not invited to go; this for myself I state plainly, but being a question of fact I leave it to you. Mr. SWANZY was not examined in London, but unknown to Mr. THOMPSON a proposition was made through Mr. BATES. There is no reason for supposing that Mr. BATES has not accurately stated what occurred, for though Mr. SWANZY states 3 guineas a day were offered to him, and Mr. BATES says there was no sum specified, yet in the substance of the thing they agree. There was a condition that Mr. SWANZY should cede all demands, but you are not to conclude immediately that there was therefore an admission of liability by the party offering it; you must judge from what preceded(sic) whether there were claims to be ceded. Where claims are made it may be convenient to have them waived, even though they have no foundation. The releasing of them may be desirable if it were only to avoid importunity and vexatious litigation; whether it was so in this particular case it is for you, gentlemen, to say. Now, supposing that Mr. SWANZY had some demand for which Mr. THOMPSON was answerable, what is its amount? What has been proved on the part of the plaintiff? The bill of particulars is quite wild; one hundred pounds are asked for general superintendence of the concerns of the Company. Where is there evidence of any such superintendence? Can it fairly be said to have been desired after the letters written by Mr. THOMPSON? They seem to put an end to claims subsequent to their date, at least. You will consider the attendance at Cootehill, and see whether it falls within the category of things done for the benefit of the Company and to be compensated for, and also if there was anything else for which the plaintiff is entitled to consideration. For services properly rendered, MR. THOMPSON does not dispute his liability. I now leave the case in your hands; you have only two points to inquire into, whether there were services rendered to the company, and for which Mr. THOMPSON is liable by authorising their performance himself, or through any one acting for him, and not clearly revoked, and, secondly, what was the extent of those services.
The jury retired, and after consulting together for several hours, declared that they could not agree to a verdict.
We understand that eleven were agreed to find for the plaintiff, and one for the defendant.
Counsel for the Plaintiff - Messrs. Robert JOHNSTON, James LOWRY, and Robert CARSON. Attorney - Mr. Edward M'GAURAN.
Counsel for the Defendant - Messrs. J. MAJOR, Q.C., J. BROOKE, Q.C., and Dr. M'CAUSLAND. Attorneys - Messrs. BATES and John ARMSTRONG.
Butler, appellant; McBRIDE (? Or M. BRIDE) and others, respondents.
This was an appeal to an Ejectment. Dismiss pronounced by the Barrister at last Cavan Sessions, on the grounds that the ejectment was defective in form, inasmuch as it did not state by whom the lease was made, which the Assistant Barrister decided was required by the 15th of the Assistant Barrister's rules.
Mr. KNIPE, for the appellant, having stated to his Lordship the grounds on which the case was dismissed, below, and having read the ejectment and the 15th rule, contended that the rule did not apply to ejectments brought on expiration of demise, which this was, and that the ejectment was correct both in form and substance.
Mr. Robert JOHNSTON, counsel for respondents, contended that the Assistant Barrister was right in dismissing the ejectment on the grounds stated.
Baron PENNEFATHER - I think the ejectment is quite correct; and his Lordship asked if there was any other grounds of defense.
Mr. JOHNSTON stated that he understood the appellant could not prove that the lives in the lease were all dead.
Mr. KNIPE then stated the appellants case, by which it appeared that James WILSON, one of the lives in the lease, had many years ago gone to America, the other two live, it was admitted, were dead, and read a letter directed to Wm. WILSON, detailing the death of said James WILSON as having occurred in June last.
John WILSON, examined by Mr. KNIPE, proved handwriting to letter from his uncle Robert in America, telling of the death of his uncle James.
Cross-examined by Mr. JOHNSTON - It was so late as March last that my father received the letter.
Mr. JOHNSTON objected that a letter so recently received was not sufficient evidence of the death, where the persons had been heard of within seven years.
Baron PENNEFATHER having asked the witness if it was the opinion among the family of James WILSON that he was dead, and having stated that it was, the judge admitted the evidence, and eventually reversed the dismiss, and granted a decree to possession with costs.
July 19, 1855
RECORD COURT.
FRIDAY, JULY 13
(Before the Hon. Baron PENNEFATHER.)
Swanzy v. Thompson
Mr. CARSON opened the pleadings. It was an action for 287£ 12s. 0d. due to plaintiff for services done for the defendant, and at his instance. The issue was, whether there were any such services rendered at defendant's instance.
Mr. R. JOHNSTON stated the case. He said his client was Clerk of the Crown in the county, and a solicitor of great eminence, who, surely, would not come into this court as plaintiff in an action which he was not well able to substantiate. The hurors knew, every man in Court knew, how well calculated Mr. SWANZY was, from his habits and position, to render service such as should meet the sanction of a proposed Railway Company. The learned gentleman then stated the case, as it came out in evidence, contending that the request made to his client by the deputation, who came from Belfast to Cavan in June, 1853, was a retaining of him, and that Mr. THOMPSON's suggestion to Mr. HAGUE, of some 230 £ or 300 £ for Mr. SWANZY, was an approval of this retainer. Mr. JOHNSTON concluded by stating, that if the defendant deemed Mr. SWANZY not to be entitled to so much as he claimed, he should have paid into court whatever he believed to be fair, and left him to abide the issue ; but he paid in nothing, made no offer of any kind, and now to his own risk be it.
We are sorry that we cannot give the learned gentleman's speech in extenso, our reporter having been engaged in the Crown Court, while it was being delivered. We understand that a reporter from the Daily Express was present at the time, but he has not thought proper to publish it.
W. HAGUE, Esq., examined by Mr. LOWRY -- Recollects a railway beingcontemplated to Cavan from Armagh to Clones. Some Belfast gentlemen came here about that project. Mr. THOMPSON was here on one occasion. Cannot say that it was in June, 1853. Thinks it was in 1853. Does not remember who was with him. It is possible Major ANKETEL was. Might have had a communication with Mr. SWANZY on the occasion. Recollects a meeting held in Cavan, at whish Mr. Theophilus THOMPSON presided. Does not know whether Mr. THOMPSON of Belfast attended that meeting. Made no application to Mr. SWANZY at the instance of Mr. THOMPSON or the gentleman who accompanied him. Does not recollect whether Mr. SWANZY was present at that meeting, but thinks he attended every meeting. Mr. DOLLING, Major ANKETEL, and Mr. LANKTREE formed a deputation to the Grand Jury at an assizes in Cavan. Witness went to Belfast with Dr. ROE and Mr. SWANZY to attend a meeting there. Mr. SWANZY applied to be joined as a solicitor with Mr. BATES in the railway scheme. Witness understood the committee to saw that as soon as a Board of Directors was appointed Mr. SWANZY would be compensated for his services, or have his claims laid before them. Had a conversation himself with Mr. THOMPSON immediately after the meeting in Belfast. Mr. THOMPSON asked would 200 £ or 300 £ satisfy Mr. SWANZY. Withness said he thought 300 £ would. Had no communication with Mr. THOMPSON or Mr. BATES as to Mr. SWANZY's going to London. Witness went to London in Summer, 1854. Mr. W. THOMPSON, of the Ulster Bank, went with him. Mr. SWANZY came to London after witness, who advised him to go there, but had no authority to direct him to it. The company had a committee in London, of which Mr. THOMPSON was chairman, as he understood. Was present in London when an offer of 3 guineas a day during his stay in London was made to Mr. SWANZY. He remained a week there. Mr. THOMPSON and two or three others of the committee made the offer, but it was a conditional one, that he should have no further claim on the company. The Dundalk and Enniskillen Company got up an opposition scheme, they held a meeting in Cootehill. Witness asked Mr. SWANZY to go there and advocate the Belfast line, but he had no directions to do so. Wrote to Mr. THOMPSON about Mr. SWANZY's services, and got an answer from Mr. BATES to that effect, that Mr. SWANZY's case would be considered and justice done him. Mr. SWANZY acted generally and beneficially for the Belfast Company, and was their best friend here.
Cross-examined by Mr. MAJOR, Q.C. -- In Mr. BATES' letter to witness about going to London, there was no word of bringing over Mr. SWANZY. Mr. SWANZY went to Belfast to prefer whatever claims he had. Thinks the Belfast and West of Ireland Company had not then been formed. Cannot specify what services Mr. SWANZY rendered to the company, but he is sure he had claims. He stated that he attended several meetings at his own expense, and had done other things which cost him a great deal of money. Thinks the Belfast and West of Ireland Company got the benefit of all Mr. SWANZY's services. Mr. SWANZY was not asked by the company to go to London. Witness advised him to go. Mr. WALLACE was solicitor to a former company. Never heard Mr. SWANZY say he was a terrible fellow, nor knew him to have an eye on a share of Mr. WALLACE's profits as well as Mr. BATES's. Cannot say that all Mr. SWANZY's services were a mere speculation, having in view a share in the solicitorship to the company.
To a Juror -- Mr. SWANZY claimed no particular sum at the meeting in Belfast; it was in a private conversation that Mr. THOMPSON inquired whether 200 £ or 300 £ would satisfy Mr. SWANZY. That gentleman had first made his claim for services rendered, and this in the presence of Mr. THOMPSON.
Cross-examination resumed. Thinks Mr. THOMPSON stated at the meeting, and from the chair, that Mr. SWANZY might not expect to be remunerated for any claims he might have had on any former company. Did not hear Mr. THOMPSON say that the claims Mr. SWANZY had put forward at the meeting were claims upon another company.
William THOMPSON, Edq., examined by Mr. CARSON -- Was Manager of the Ulster Bank in Cavan in 1853. Remembers the Belfast and West of Ireland Railway Company being contemplated that year. A meeting was held in Cavan at which a deputation from Belfast attended. Mr. LANKTREE and Mr. THOMPSON, he believes, were here. Mr. THOMPSON was here at some meeting, some other gentleman came with him ; it was on matters relative to the railway they came. Does not recollect whether he had any conversation with any deputation relative to Mr. SWANZY, in Mr. THOMPSON's presence. Was in London in 1854, Mr. SWANZY was there too. He made claims, for services rendered, through witness and Mr. HAGUE ; the claims were opposed by some members of the committee and Mr. BATES. Cannot say whether any offer was made to Mr. SWANZY by the committee ; knows that Mr. SWANZY was very active in supporting the company.
Cross-examined by Mr. BROOKE, Q.C. -- Witness was very active himself in the matter of the railway. MR. SWANZY attended the meeting and made a speech there. On several occassions(sic) he complained of his services being unrequited by former companies. Mr. SWAZY was not examined by the committee in London ; his object in going to London was to have his claims settled. Knows not what those claims were.
George ROE, Esq., M.D., examined by Mr. LOWRY. -- Was a shareholder in the Belfast and West of Ireland Railway ; attended a public meeting in Belfast, in September, 1853 ; Mr. THOMPSON was chairman then ; Mr. SWAZY applied to have his claims settled ; these involved claims on former companies but nothing was determined upon the matter, except a feeling of acknowledgement of the services he had rendered. Is quite sure that Mr. SWAZY rendered active service to the Belfast and West of Ireland Company.
To a juror -- It was not Mr. SWAZY that asked withness to take shares in the line.
Cross-examined by Mr. M'CAUSLAND -- Is sorry to say he is a shareholder. Mr. LANKTREE induced him to take the shares ; witness had taken his shares previous to the meeting in Belfast ; he was summoned as a shareholder. Mr. SWANZY said not a word at that meeting about being made joint solicitor, or sharing in the profits ; nor did he ver say anything of such import to witness at any time.
Samuel SWANZY, Esq., examined by Mr. CARSON -- Is plaintiff in this action ; a line from Belfast to Cavan was contemplated in 1853; a meeting was held in Cavan at which witness attended ; a deputation from Belfast was present ; does not know whether Mr. THOMPSON was one of them. The meeting in Cavan was held in June 1853 ; the next meeting he attended was held in Belfast, in September, 1853. After the proceedings had terminated witness put in his claims for compensation, as he believed himself retained previous to the meeting in Cavan. An opposite line was projected ; the supporters of it held a meeting in Cootehill, in December, 1853, which witness attended, and where he argued against the Dundalk and Enniskillen line. It was Mr. HAGUE that directed him to go there. Witness went to London in spring, 1854 ; an error in the engineering having enterfered(sic) with the project of the Belfast company, a petition to waive standing orders was got in Cavan, and witness went over to see everything right about it. Had a conversation with Mr. THOMPSON in London, and was told that his claims would be considered. He was afterwards offered three guineas a day during the time the committee sat, if he waived all claims on the company.
Cross-examined by Mr. MAJOR Q.C. -- Went over in spring, 1854, to London without any direction, but believing himself engaged in the matter ; went to London in May, 1854, to attend the Parliamentary Committee, having documents which he thought of considerable value to produce ; witness was not directed positively to go this time either ; does not recollect ever having threatened to oppose the company, if he was not paid. Believes but for his being involved in the Belfast line, he would have been engaged by the other company. At the time of his appearing in Belfast he had no services but prospective ones to make claims for. He wanted either to have a share in the solicitorship, or to be compensated for his trouble in discussing the matter, inducing people to take shares, &c., &c, cannot undertake to name the persons whom he induced to take the shares. Too many took shares, but Mr. BATES got the large one, 26,000 pounds.
To a Juror -- Mr. HAGUE told witness that he was to get two or three hundred pounds.
To another Juror -- Did not attend the first meeting in Cavan until he was solicited to go there ; think it was Mr. LANKTREE, in company with Mr. William JOHNSTON who engaged him to go.
The case for the plaintiff closed here.
Mr. MAJOR claimed a non-suit. The issue was whether --
Court -- Oh ! I will take a note of your application.
Mr. MAJOR -- Then gentlemen of the jury I have to address you in a most unpleasant case. This is an extraordinary action ; it is a novel action, and the more so, as being brought by the one holding a high position in the county, officially and professionally, and against one of high station in Belfast, who would not appear before you unless he had good grounds to rest upon. Mr. THOOMPSON is one of the first merchants in Belfast, and connected with the banks there ; such a one must have well founded grounds of denying all retainer or he would not come to deny it ; but he freels it his duty, confided in, as he was, by a large number of men, whom he induced to take shares in a certain undertaking, to resist this gross attempt to obtain remuneration for services that were never rendered, and that Mr. SWANZY rendered no services to the company with which Mr. THOMPSON was concerned, I will show under his own hand. I asked Mr. SWANZY what services he rendered. Were they professional? There were none such. But he induced people to subscribe for shares. Was it faitting in one holding his high position to run about the county spurring men to take shares from a company only in its infancy. Should he have gone to London uninvited, and then ask pecuriary compensation? His sole object was to obtain a share in the solicitorship of the company. Is there any evidence of services rendered from Mr. SWANZY himself, though he was brought up the lat witness, while in honest cases the plaintiff is always the first produced. Just let me read for you his bill of particulars. Attending meeitng in Cavan ; 'Inducing and procuring persons to take shares.' Whom did he induce? He cannot name one, and yet he claims 50 £ for this service. "Attending meeting in Belfast." What! is it the meeting to which he went to prefer his own claims? It was sworn that such was his object in attending it, and yet he modestly asks for 25 £, stating that he went there for "like purposes," that is to "induce and procure persons to take shares." Next for attending the meeting in Cootehill, for "like purposes," he asks you to give 12 £ 12 s. Was it not Mr. SWANZY's ardent zeal for the solicitorship that sent him about on these errands? He goes to London uninvited, was not examined as a witness, and asks for his visit only 100 £, and for general superintendence ofdefendants interests, and procuring signatures to petitions, from June, 1853 to May, 1854, he asks a similar sum. -- Gentlemen, from 1851 there were projects afloat in the counties of Cavan, Monaghan, Armagh, and Westmeath to effect junctions with the Ulster Railway. The Midland Great Western Railway Company desired to extend their line to Cavan, and efforts we5re made by them to promote this object. Mr. SWANZY was ardent in their behalf, and they ended by treating him abominably. In the latter-end of 1852, they succeeded in obtaining a bill, enabling them to connect their line with Cavan, and a project to unite lines was immediately conceived by the Ulster Company, by making an extension from Armagh to Cvan. But that project was only conceived, for at a meeting held in Belfast, in September 1852 the shareholders dclared against and repudiated it. It dropped then, but out of it arose another association -- the Belfast and West of Ireland Junction Company. To this Mr. SWANZY never did any service. He made speeches, but he never got a shareholder, the only way of serving a company. This project progressed. Shareholders were got, principally in Belfast, and some few in Monaghan. The meeting in Cavan was the first opening out of the speculation in this county, and from that time Mr. SWAZY never served it with the assent of Mr. THOMPSON. An attempt was made by the company to get rid of the standing orders in 1852, but they were unsuccessfull, and the matter was protracted to 1854, when the project came before Pa4liament, and was rejected. Soon after a compromise was come to between the opposite companies, by means of it the Dundalk and Enniskillen Companies got their bill, and an end was put to Mr. THOMPSON's line, which was not involved in any proceedin or subsequent projects. But Mr. SWANZT most inageniously wishes to make it pay for services alleged to be rendered to his predecessors, and this I will show you from some letters of that gentleman, which I must take the liberty of reading for you -- (The learned CONNORS then read a number of long letters, upon which he commented) -- ON the 13th of April, 1852, 9 months before any attempt was made to form the Belfast and West of Ireland Company, he writes to Mr. ANKETELL(sic) that Colonel CLEMENTS cannot go to London in condequence of bad health, and, ther is not an other man, who would go, in this "wretched county." He could not go himself unless he was undemnitie(?)', and he hardly hoped that, the people could be induced to do this for him. Sir J. YOUNG(?) could not be trusted (a laugh), and as for Mr. MAXWELL, he was a mere cypher, he had no head (roars of laughter). If he could go himself it would do well, as he could represent the town of Cavan, being chairman of the town commissioners. How could the House of Commons resis that idea ; the great chairman of the Cavan commissioners in his dignity before them. Surely, they should yield to the pressure (great laughter). On the 4th of May 1852, still previous to the formation of Mr. THOMPSON's Company, he again writes to Mr. ANKETELL stating that his opinion, that the Company 00 the Armagh and Cavan Company, not the Belfast and West of Ireland -- should send him to parliament in aid of their proect. HE becomes confidential, and says, "entre nous I am to direct evidence for the Mullingar people in London. Would you wish to be summonded as a witness?" And then how careful he is to provide for the comforts of the visit. "Could we bring our agreeable friend MORPHY," he asks, (a laugh) but here his ruling idea peeps out again, "are there, Mr. SWANZY inquires, any crumbs likelu to fall at the Monaghan election?" (much laughter). Anon he shows himself a statesman and a patriot. "BUTT is returned for Harwich, it would be pleasant to put in Doiling(?) and mae a party." This was not done, and yet the Chairman of Cavan town Xommissioners willed it. But all this pleasant scheme wass frustrated for on the 13th of May, 1852, Mr. SWANZY again writes to Mr. ANKETELL. "A great change has occurred in relation to my connexion with the Midland Great Western Company. A few days ago I was asked to procure witnesses, and name my iterms, I replied that, I preferred leaving the latter to themselves. The solicitor, however, for some cause, has interfered to get rid of me." To get rid of Mr. SWANZY, is it possible? of the chairman of the town commissioners? No, it could not be. But he continues, "I was this day told I need go to no more trouble. Must I act in opposition to them? I feel a difficult in doing so, for any adverse step of mine might injure the propsed line from Armagh to Cavan."
July 26, 1855
Summary Of News
A young girl named PAYNE was convicted at the Waterford Assizes of the murder of her illegitimate female child on 30th May last. She was sentenced by Judge CRAMPTON to suffer the extreme punishment of the law, as sentence which, his Lordship told her, he would recommend the Lord Lieutenant to commute into perpetual imprisonment.
The Maidstone Journal, in noticing the local swimming club, containing ninety seven members, first rate swimmers, &c., says. – The first squatie (squatic?) breakfast is to take place on Monday next, at seven o’clock, when every member will be required to partake of the repast in the river.
It is currently reported in naval circles that Captain Harry SMITH, late of her Majesty’s ship Ganges, and promoted from Haslar hospital, is likely to be appointed to the command of Cork station as Admiral, in the room of Admiral Sir. W. CARROLL.
A bill has been introduced into Parliament by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Wilson revoking certain payments annually paid out of the consolidated fund to the provost of Trinity College, Dublin, for himself and fellows, and also for the Professors of French and German, and of Spanish and Italian languages. It also repeals the stamp duty heretofore payable on admission and matriculation and when taking degrees, and does away with all charges for registry and entry.
The Galway Vindicator states that a large posse of police and military were brought in to the Claddagh on Tuesday week to dispossess thirty seven families residing on the property of Henry GRATTAN, Esq. The brigade refused to proceed further when they had leveled eleven houses. Our contemporary states that large arrears of rent and poor rate were due, and this in conjunction with the existence of nuisances in the locality necessitated the conviction.
Out of seventy men who volunteered from the Limerick Militia, sixty three have been rejected by the Doctor and Drill Sergeant.
The Grand Jury ignored the bills that were sent up to them in the case of the men who were for trial at the Tyrone Assizes for being concerned in the Trillick outrage. The Attorney General went down to prosecute in person.
The Fermanagh Mail states that an asylum, erected by Major STERNS of Golagh Castle, in the County of Fermanagh, for the reception of the wives and children of soldiers who die4 in the Crimea, is open for inspection. It is a noble example set to landlords, and it were to be wished that it was extensively followed.
The Hon H. COLE, M.P., has retired from the Lieutenant Colonelcy of the Fermanagh Militia, and been succeeded by Major CRICHTON, brother to Lord Erne. Captain ARCHDALL, late of the 11th Regiment, has been promoted to the majority, and Lieutenant BARTON to a company, vice the Hon. J. C. BUTLER, who retires.
An old woman died in Belfast General Hospital on Thursday last from injuries received in consequence of a dog belonging to a Mr. WALKER attacking and lacerating her in the arms and wrists.
It is supposed that all the works and apparatuses to be brought against the Malakoff cannot be completed before Saturday the 28th.Six deaths from cholera are reported as having taken place in London last week.
A most extraordinary double suicide took place in New York some time ago. A young Englishwoman and her lover, an American, went into the garden of the parents of the latter, and seating themselves on a lounge in the pleasure grounds, partook of prussic acid, locked themselves up, each in the arms of the other, and were found dead. The female was of easy virtue from the time of her acquaintance with her partner in death, who first seduced, then abandoned her, and afterwards returned to live upon the wages of her shame.
Four out of five daily newspapers, stated since the late stamp came into operation, in Manchester, have already died of literal destitution.
A Postmaster of Amsterdam, who absconded some days ago with £50 worth of Dutch securities, was arrested in London and committed suicide in prison.
An act to prevent railway accidents has been brought before the house. It ordains that there shall be a communication between guards and drivers, and gives a power to the Board of Works to substitute bridges for level crossings at the expense of the company. It also makes companies responsible for the faults of their servants.
We understand that the Royal Dublin Society has received a letter from the Earl of Eglinton, enclosing a draft for fifty pounds, his lordship’s munificent subscription to the fund for building the new museum of this time honoured institution.
On Monday morning the examination of candidates for the civil service in India took place at King’s College, when one hundred and thirteen candidates presented themselves.
The population returns of twenty districts in India give the number 10,765,478. When those of Peshawur, say 500,000, and Lela 200,000, are added, the grand total will be found somewhere about eleven and a half millions.
The enlistment for the Foreign Legion is at last proceeding with some activity. Among the corps to be raised are ten thousand Germans, five thousand Swiss, five thousand Italians, and twenty thousand Turks. Beston’s Irregular Cavalry is to consist to 4,000 (1,000?) sabers.
A fifth point is, it is said, about being added to the celebrated four, namely, the cession of the Crimea to turkey, of the Danubian Principalities to Austria, and of Lombardy to Piedmont.
A man named OATES, residing in Lambeth, committed suicide on Sunday week, just eight days after his marriage.
It is stated that it is in contemplation to form an exclusively Irish corps, to be called the Irish Brigade, for service in the war against Russia.
The coroner, sin summing up the evidence given at an inquest held on the body of Mr. Joseph RYAN, who was drowned in the Royal Surrey Canal, stated that plunging into the water, when the body is excited by drink almost invariably produces apoplexy.
Lord DUNALLEY has established his claim before a committee of privileges of the House of Lords to vote at the election of representative Peers for Ireland, Lord ASHTOWN has also established his claim.
Lord EYRE, who, with his Irish Brigade, crowned himself with distinction on the fatal 18th of June before Sebastopol, has had his leg amputated, and is coming to England.
‘There has just appeared at Turin,’ says the Union, ‘under the title of La Voce del Progression Commerciale, a journal which is connected with the revolutionary party. In the first number of this
journal is a letter from Mazzial, afterwards copied into the Italia e Popolo, which eulogizes regicide and assassination.
France and England have agreed to send further reinforcement to the Crimea forthwith. Orders are issued from the Horse Guards for all officers on sick leave to join their regiments in the Crimea, unless in cases of serious illness.
In sending newspapers to the colonies, the general rule henceforth will be to charge 1d., plus any foreign transit rate on dispatch; but such charge will carry the newspaper to its destination. In like manner the colonial governments will collect a prepaid postage on newspapers sent to this country such papers being delivered free. The 2d. charged on papers sent to Canada, when sent through the United States (if not so sent the charge is only 1d.), includes the transit rate of 1d. hitherto paid on delivery. The same rate of charge will extend to all places abroad, except where existing treaties interfere.
The cholera is raging with the most fatal effect in several portions of the Austrian Empire, particularly in Hungary and Poland.
The body of a young man named CAIRNS, who had thrown himself into the Liffey, was recovered on Thursday, and immediately afterwards his brother shot himself.
The Legislature of Massachusetts has passed a law obliging the public schools to admit Negroes among the pupils.
The total number of emigrants who have sailed from Liverpool for all foreign ports during the 3 months ending June 20th was 12,880, against 14,330 in the corresponding quarter of 1854. The decrease is not confined to any particular branch of the emigration trade.
Ta parliamentary return, published on Friday, gives some particulars regarding appointments to commissions in the army. It appears that from the 1st of January, 1853, to the 16th of January, 1855, the sum realized by the sale of army commissions on account of the Government was £62,370.
Two boys, named LITTLE and CLARKE, were drowned in the Canal near Navan on the 17th last, and a young man named FEGAN, who gallantly plunged into their rescue, nearly shared their fate. He brought both out of the water; one was quite dead, the other still survived, but died in a short time.
Two men, named CAVANAGH and KELLY, were convicted at the Longford Assizes, and sentenced to six years penal servitude for a Whiteboy attack on the house of a man named Michael RYAN.
The Gassete(? Illegible) contains a first report from the Patriotic Fund Commissioners, on their proceedings and the result. The total number now is 1,217(?) widows, 1,908(?) children, and 35 children who have lost their parents.
Great apprehensions are entertained at Bessarabia lest the allied armies should invade that town. To be prepared against such an event fresh fortifications are being raised and large bodies of troops (illegible… ed), in order to effect every possible resistance.
The New York Herald says: -- "The beautiful harvest which is about to bless the land with so much more than relieve the misery which the famine prison of the last twelve months have occasioned. It will enrich the whole country, and give the (illegible) to trade and commerce which is secondary to repair the disasters recently superi.(llegible).ed."
Fergus FARRELL, the (illegible) merchant, and John Adye CERRAS(?), Barrister at Law, are both named for the Mayorality of Dublin next year.
Mr. Thomas WILSON, a Belfast man, committed suicide in London last week.
WANTON OUTRAGE. – Some time ago, some miscreants entered the graveyard of Dromlin, and smashed a valuable tombstone erected to the memory of the late Mr. John SHARKEY, by his affectionate widow, Mrs. Mary SHARKY, or Dunleer. We trust that the wretches who thus desecrated the grave of the dead, may be made amenable to that justice they have so flagrantly violated. – Drogheda Argus.
HARD CASE OF A PAUPER GIRL. – On Thursday morning a girl named Sarah BRENNAN was landed from the deck of the steamer Stag, very poorly clothed, and in a destitute condition. She stated that she had been placed on board the steamer by the poor law authorities of Paisley; that she belonged to Keedy, but had been in Scotland for a considerable period. She had been sent over without any means of personal protection or subsistences, and was so debilitated by hardship and sickness as to be unable to walk. Inspector MAGEE considerately procured a car for the poor creature, and sent her to the relieving officer, who procured admission for her, to the workhouse. – Belfast Telegraphic Circular.
TOWNS’ IMPROVEMENT ACT.
LAST WEEK we could do no more than give a report of the proceedings at the meeting which decreed with a laudable unanimity that the New Towns’ Improvement Act should be brought into operation in Cavan, but to-day we make room for a few observations of our own on the subject. Heretofore a great cry has been raised against the old commissioners as if they were quite useless in their corporate capacity; and we must admit that there were some grounds for the impeachment, pleading, however, in their behalf that they were so confined by the limits of the old act, and so far restricted in pecuniary matters that it was not easy for them to show work. But happily these excuses hold no longer; a more extended range of operations is open to the commissioners, and they are empowered to raise annually nearly double as much as they could before, so that, if they do not prove active there is neither justification nor extenuation for them. As far as the lighting and cleansing of the town are concerned we have not much to say; these duties were pretty well attended to heretofore, considering the means that were at the disposal of the commissioners for the purpose. There is room for improvement, even in these respects, to be sure; but that improvement will come of itself out of the greater facility that exists for it, so that there is no occasion for our urging it. But there are two other things to which we would direct special attention – the keeping the streets clear of beggars and the roads round the town free from those abandoned women who in such numbers pollute it. Both duties devolve on the commissioners under the new act, and their fulfillment is a stern though it may be an odious duty. For the life of us we cannot conceive what is gained by the keeping up of a poors’ house within a mile of the town, for the beggars swarm in such numbers round a person in whatever end of the town he finds himself, that they could not be more numerous if there were no such establishment. Every stranger, who comes amongst us, remarks upon this rather ungracious characteristic of our town, and every inhabitant is made to feel it in a manner that should cause him the most intense pain were it not that his sensibility is somewhat blunted by being so long habituated to the importunity. As to the other point, we do not wish to dwell upon it nor need we3 do so, for every person is alive to the horrible inconveniences, which the neglect of it up to this has subjected him to. If a person whishes to enjoy a walk in the cool of the evening, there is no direction, in which he turns, where those wretches do not present themselves, and his is obliged, if he would avoid the contamination of their presence to get home and shut himself up within doors. Then look to the huts, which they have pitched up on Tullymongan Hill; it must have shocked the least sensitive to see them on last fair day going into and coming out of those hovels incessantly, striving to decoy and meditation robbery of the unfortunate man who was selling his cow to meet the landlord, or buying one to give mil to his family. Every one of those dens of iniquity ought to be levelled and burned to ashes, and the commissioners are bound, in justice to the moral sense of the community, to see to their overthrow. Speaking of the Fair Green, we are reminded of the suggestion of a respectable merchant of this town. He says, and we agree with him, that it is very badly adapted for showing stock, precipitous and exposed to wind and weather, as it is. He proposes, therefore, that a Fair Green be established in some other place, and that the hill be planted and laid out in walks, as a place of recreation for the townspeople, a purpose for which it is admirably suited. As much money as would be required to effect this could not, he thinks, be difficult of collection in the town and neighbourhood. We must say that in the same circumstances the plan was adopted in Enniskillen and succeeded there, and we see no sufficient reason, why it might not be adopted and succeed in Cavan. We give the suggestion as it came to us, and leave our readers to think and say how much it is worth.
KILMORE ACADEMY. – The usual examinations came off last week before the Right Rev. Drs. BROWN and BRADY, and the Rev., John O’REILLY, Rev. Patrick MAGUINESS, and Rev. Edward LYNCH. The answering was most creditable to the students and the efficient gentlemen who have upon them the care of the institution, and gave abundant evidence that the distinctions which pupils of this seminary have so largely obtained in Maynooth, Trinity College, and Galway, are sure to be perpetuated. When upon this subject we may as well state that the fifteenth anniversary of the establishment was celebrated on Tuesday last. A solemn office and requiem mass were chaunted(sic), and a large party sat down to dinner in the evening.
THE MILITIA. – The members of this force, stationed in Cavan, amused themselves and many of the inhabitants of the town, on Friday last, by running races on foot, leaping, and throwing a stone, and going through other field sports, in Swellan. The band is getting on admirably; they played through the town on Tuesday morning last, as a detachment was leaving for Belturbet, and played well. Really, their proficiency is surprising, when it is considered that they are only a few months in training, and reflects the highest credit on Mr. Lewis, their instructor. He must have been exceedingly attentive to his pupils, and possessed of great skill to make them what they have proved themselves to be.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. – The Rev. P. SMYTH, curate of Kilmore, has been promoted to the Parish of Killesher, vacant by the decease of Reverend John GALLAGHER, whose virtues, learning and kindness the people there had only time to appreciate when he was called from amongst them to the Master whom he so well served. The regret of the Kilmore men for the loss of Mr. SMYTH is acute and universal, and no wonder; for a better priest or a more perfect gentleman than their late curate has not existence.
THE MAYNOOTH QUESTION. – We find the name of Robert BURROWES, Esq., M.P. for this county amongst those who voted with Mr. SPOONER that an inquiry should be instituted into the fact of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy having their titles assigned them in the report that emanated from the commissioners appointed to inquire into the College of Maynooth. When Mr. BURROWES advocated the cause of the tenant farmer, we made the matter known to our readers, and we feel ourselves called on to notify his last vote as well.
THE WEATHER – THE CROPS. – Incessant and heavy rain prevailed during the work, and oats and flax and potatoes show its influence, and the former are prostrate in many places, and the latter growing to tope(?). Potatoes are however coming plentifully late market and sold for 8d. a stone. A cart of Peleys (Poleys?) grown by Mr. REILY of Derrygarra, which came in this day, are as fine so say we ever saw; large, round, and firm, nothing could improve(?) them.
DINNER IN BALLYHAISE.
A dinner was given, on yesterday evening, in the Market House, in Ballyhaise, to Mr. Hugh CLIFFORD BOYD, on the occasion of his retiring from Mr. HUMPHREYS’s estate – the agricultural interests of which he attended to for five years – to the county Fermanagh. The room was thronged, chiefly by Mr. HUMPHREYS’s tenants, who were loud in the expression of their gratitude to Mr. BOYD, for the services he had rendered to them during the period of his sojourn amongst them. Many of them stated that, were it not for the system he taught and even forced them to adopt, they would now be in America or the poorhouse, instead of being able to live comfortably in the farms, upon which they were born. L Upwards of fifty sat down to dinner, which was prepared and served up in a manner that reflects the highest credit on Mrs. KENNEDY, under whose direction it was got up. JOHN EMMITT, Esq., was called to the chair, and on either side of him sat the guest of the evening and the Rev. James CARSON of this town. The vice chair was ably filled by Wm. MOORE, Esq., of Cavan, and the secretaries, Messrs. NESBITT, EBBITT, and TOPHAM, were indefatigable in seeing to the comfort of every one who was present on the occasion. We do not remember so instance in which everything passed off so well, or where greater enthusiasm towards the person, whom it was intended to honour, was manifested. The people on whom he worked and whom be made to prosper were the exhibitors, and they did not fail to testify their sense of his deservings; nor was their testimony the less creditable, because it was given to a gentleman who was quitting them, and had, therefore, no opportunity of doing them further service. Homage rendered to persons in power is always suspicious, but where it is offered to one, who has ceased to be connected with those who bestow it, it is alike creditable to him and them.
When the cloth was removed Mr. Thomas TOPHAM read letters of apology from the Rev. Mr. MONEYPENNY, and Dr. ATKINS, whom business kept away from the meeting.
The chairman then proposed the usual loyal toasts which were drunk with all the honours.
He then proposed "The Lord Lieutenant, and prosperity to Ireland."
Dr. KELLY, being called upon to respond to the toast, said that he felt greatly honoured in having his humble name associated with that of so distinguished a personage as the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. He was, however, still more flattered in being connected with the latter part of the toast, and from his heart he wished, as every man present did, that Ireland might grow in prosperity, increasing every day and knowing no limits.
"The Allied Armey and Navy" was given next and received with enthusiasm.
The chairman then proposed "The Guest of the evening." Every one present knew Mr. BOYD and had practical proof of the services which he rendered to the farmers on the Ballyhaise estate. He had made every part of it like a garden and was well deserving of the honour conferred upon him this evening.
When the cheering with which his name was received had subsided, Mr. BOYD rose and said – Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, in rising to thank you for the very flattering manner in which you, Sir, have proposed my health, as well as for the very kind way in which that toast has been received, you will permit me to say, with all sincerity, that I did not expect, nor had I any claim to expect such a distinguished and undeserved mark of you approbation and esteem as that of which you make me this evening the recipient (hear). Five years have to-morrow elapsed since I entered upon the duties of the situation I now resign, and there can, in my mind – if you will allow me a little egotism – be no better proof of the manner in which these duties were discharged than this spontaneous mark of your approval (hear, hear). On this heard I will only say, that I trust my mantle may fall upon my successor, whom I am proud to see amongst you this evening, and my best wishes for his welfare are accompanied with the hope, that he may early learn to appreciate the honest Irish hearts with whom he will be officially brought in contact (cheers). You have, Sir, been pleased to allude to the improvements which have been made these last years on this estate, and have associated my name with them in a manner which no act of mine deserves; but if your partiality for me will, however, mix me up with them, the only credit, I assure you, I can take to myself for anything which has been accomplished is, that I have fearlessly and conscientiously carried out, to the best of my humble ability, the instructions of my late employer, Mr. M’LANAHAN (hear, hear). That much good has been done, through the agency employed during the last give years, few who – knowing the conditions of the property and state of the tenants now contrast them with what they were then – will venture to deny; yet I (illegible) here, without fear of contradiction, that what has been achieved is not the one-tenth of what ought to have been done, nor is it even in proportion to the amount of labour, toil, and anxiety which have been bestowed in the (illegible) (illegible) to improve the estate, and consequently, ameliorate the condition of the tenantry. (hear, hear, and loud cheers). This is an unpleasant fact to be put on record; and as it is the reluctant testimony of "one that (illegible) official (illegible) with you this evening, and as he sees a "child below there taking notes, and faith he’ll print them" (laughter), he is desirous of putting it in judgment against you, notwithstanding his personal and your own feelings on the matter (hear). But while I deplore the (illegible) of (illegible) which has attended our efforts, yet I rejoice that the foundation has been laid, upon which will ultimately be reared the superstructure of good practical husbandry; and as example is contagious, I feel it is no day-dream of mine to expect, that before many years will have elapsed Mr. HUMPHREYS’ Ballyhaise estate will be the model farm of the county – that its tenants will be comfortable and happy, realizing the blessings resulting from their own honest industry, "being," in the words of Scriptures, "under their own vine and fig-tree, none to make them afraid" (cheers). It is, sir, cheering to have a spot like this for the eye to dwell upon, amidst the general agricultural ignorance which pervades this county, and what so makes the prospect even more grateful is the fact that in my humble and subordinate capacity, I have, in a measure, been the instrument of effecting this change. I congratulate you, gentlemen, tenants on the Ballyhaise estate, on the position you agriculturally occupy. You are the pioneers of farming progress in this county, and I trust you will continue to go on in the path of improvement, and when the surrounding estates must also enter the same field, you will still retain your acquired superiority (hear, hear.) To this all must, from the nature of things, come despite the amount of prejudice which is arrayed against modern innovations. The present high prices cannot last forever, and when the reaction comes, as come it will, where will be our "Paddy-go-easy" farmer with his land cropped out and filled with scotch, with no stock and no manure? Hear and cheers) – I can see nothing for him but America, the workhouse, or elsewhere. To this unhappy alternative the one half of this county will inevitably come, and the country will have again to go through the ordeal of another exercise with all its heart breaking horrors (illegible) the landlords and agents be alive to their own interest, to those of society, and to the well being of their country, by improving the tillage of their estates and conditions of their tenantry, as Mr. HUMPHREYS has done and is doing, and thus arrest the flood of ruin which threatens to invade the county (cheers.) This is not, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, a mere bugbear – it is the honest conviction of one who knows the state of the tenantry and of your country well, and as he ceases connection, perhaps for ever, with them, he takes the present opportunity of raising a warning voice to proclaim to the world the dangers which insidiously lurk around us (cheers.) I feel, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I have trespassed too long upon you; before however, I conclude let me again thank you – thank you from my heart for this crowning act of kindness, and I can assure you that the friends I have made on the Ballyhaise estate and the kindness I have at all times and on all occasions received at their hands will be forgotten only when I cease to exist, and I shall always hear with pleasure and take a lively interest in whatever may con(illegible) to the welfare of each and all and in whatever schemes may be projected to make them what all tenant farmers ought to be, comfortable and happy (hear, hear, and cheers).
Chairman – The next toast on my list is the health of one, whom we all hold in the highest esteem. You are all anxious to know the person to whom I allude, and I will gratify you. It is no other than Wm. HUMPHREYS, Esq., the lord of the soil.
The toast was drunk most enthusiastically, and responded to in fitting terms by Mr. Thomas TOPHAM.
The next toast "The Tenant Farmers on the Ballyhaise estate – the boys that can grow the turnips," was drunk with all the honours, and responded to by R. TOPHAM, who said he felt a pleasure in being one of the number, and had learned that the best way to make the farmers prosperous was to make them work hard, and grow rotatory crops. The Ballyhaise farmers did this under the auspices of a most indulgent landlord, and a skilful agriculturist, and the result was that they are happy7.
The "Health of Mr. M’LANAHAN" was the next proposed.
Mr. VEUM(?) being called on to respond, said the best speech he could make was to read the following letter:
Lissagnan House, 21st July, 1855.
DEAR SIR, -- Having heard from Mr. EBBITT that it is intended to give Mr. BOYD a public dinner on the occasion of his leaving this neighbourhood, I regret exceedingly that I cannot be of the number of his entertainers. I have arranged to leave this, and here written letters that prevent me from altering the day, besides I hasten to the sick bed of a near relative. Mr. HYSLOP, the bearer of this, will attend on my behalf and his own.
I beg to say a few words on the occasion of your meeting, which I hope the company will excuse as I should have been entitled to speak if present.
I hope my appreciation of your guest has been shown by my desire to advance him. I have never permitted my own interest to interfere with the promotion of any one connected with me, but I feel a pride and pleasure in aiding them, believing this to be my own true interest. I believe that the advancement of the world depends on the gradual improvement and rise of the very lowest amongst us, and I conceive it to be part of the duty of everyone to assist in advancing those below them in station or in knowledge and in improving their conduct, so as to fit them for the better discharge of their duties to society. I am persuaded that all really beneficial and lasting improvement begins with the real welfare of even the manual labourer, he at the spade or spindle. If we wish to build a strong and lasting edifice, we must lay a substantial and slid foundation and so, unless the base of society be secure and firmly founded, and to be in conformity to the superstructure the building cannot be stable. This will in no way injure the upper classes, but rather secure their welfare as it will compel them to go ahead and keep out of the way of being trodden under foot – thus the exertions of each member of our great community are brought into useful competition, and society moves like well oiled wheels. These have been my views for a very long time, and as I grow in years they become more confirmed.
I trust I see some appearance of growth in the seed I have sown in the estate with which some of the guests are connected; its increase will be slow, but as I believe the soil to be of fair average quality, in time there will be an appearance of bloom; but, before any of the plants come to maturity, Ii and many present on the 25th will be gathered to our fathers. To instruct the young, to overcome the strong prejudices of the aged is no easy task; but as I believe our Almighty and All-wise Creator has so constituted the human mind that it cannot effectually and truly be changed unless by conviction, I have always awaited patiently the influence of time in aid of my humble convictions.
I look, Mr. Chairman, on the compliment (illegible) about paying to Mr. BOYD as a symptom of a healthy growth in the agricultural knowledge he has assisted me to spread amongst many that will be assembled around you; he has been for five years connected with me and with the various properties I manage, and I have never heard but this opinion of him – That he was desirous to promote the real interest of all with whom he came in contact; his sphere of action will be enlarged, his opportunities of putting into practice what he has learned from me will be increased, and he will be thrown more on his own resources. I trust that thus circumstanced he will prove of service to the district he goes to, and that it may turn out that Ballyhaise had the merit of setting forth a missionary who will turn many from the errors of their ways.
Please, Mr. Chairman, to present my very best wishes to your guest for his success in his new sphere and assure him that nothing will give me greater pleasure than to learn that steady conduct, unwearying industry, and a proper regard for the welfare of his fellow creatures have placed him in the position to which these qualities always lead.
Again regretting my absence from amongst your guests,
I am yours sincerely,
JAMES M’LANNAMAN.
To the Chairman of the Dinner
Given to Mr. Hugh BOYD
"The health of the Rev. Jas CARSON, in connexion with the Presbyterian Church," was given next, and responded to in a most graceful and eloquent speech which, we are sorry, we cannot make full report of to-day. The reverend gentlemen )illegible) on the deservings of Mr. BOYD, both ecclesiastically and socially.
The Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, and the (illegible) were severally (illegible), and responded to by Mr. (illegible), Mr. MOORE, and Mr. O’REILLY, and the chair was vacated.
CAVAN UNION – THURSDAY, JULY 24.
Theophilus THOMPSON, Esq., J.P., in the chair.
Other guardians present – Messrs. Thos HARTLEY, William WHITE, William FOSTER, sen., John LYONS, John NAYLOR, William FOSTER, jun., Laurence LASH?(illegible), Robert FEGAN, Peter BRADY, and James BARROWS.
A letter was read from Mr. James REILLY, (jun.?) resigning the collection of poors-raters in the division to which he was appointed.
The clerk was ordered to advertise for a collector in his place.
A letter was read from the Poor Law Commissioners stating that they had received the report of their medical (illegible), Dr. KNOX, to the effect that the town of Cavan was in a very bad way for want of sewerage and cleanliness, more especially in the rest of the houses.
The chairman said that it was the business of the County Surveyor to look to the sewerage and ordered the relieving officer to see after the houses. The clerk was also directed to write to Mr. BRUSH, Lord Farnham’s agent, respecting a nuisance said to exist about the pleasure grounds in the town.
Another letter was read from the Commissioners refusing to agree in the re-appointment of Mr. William MAGUIRE to the situation of collector for Stradone.
The clerk was ordered to advertise for a collector in his stead.
A letter was read from the clerk of the Poor Law Union of Cootehill stating that the board did not (illegible) cause at present to co-operate with the Cavan board in bringing all the children of all the unions in the county into one place for the purpose of educating them,. They did not see what saving would be effected while vast inconvenience might result. They would not, however, be indisposed to consider the matter at another time, when they saw how the system in Enniskillen and other places where it had been adapted was working.
Chairman – I think we will not trouble them again.
State of the Workhouse for the week ending July 31, 1855.
STATE OF THE FUNDS
STATE OF THE HOUSE.
Collected and lodged during the week £0 0 0 Paid during the week 14 0 0 Balance against the union 391 17 0 Cost of provisions consumed 40 12 7 General average cost 0 1 11½ Ditto, in infirmary 0 2 3¼ Ditto, in fever hospital 0 3 5¼ Medical Report of the Cavan Union Infirmary and Workhouse
Remaining last week 392 Born 0 Admitted last week 15 Died 2 Total remaining 377 For the week ending Saturday, July 21, 1855.
CHARLES HALPIN. M.D., Physician to infirmary.
Remaining last report 79 Admitted since 6 Born 0 Discharged 5 Died 1 Total remaining 79 Medical Report of the Cavan Union Fever Hospital for the
Week ending Saturday, July 21, 1855.
Remaining last report 34 Admitted since 7 Discharged cured 4 Died 0 Total remaining 37
OLDCASTLE UNION.
The usual weekly meeting of the Board was held on the 20th inst.: R. C. WASE, Esq., in the chair.
Other guardians present – W. S. HARMON, Thomas BATTERSBY, H. SARGENT, W. BLAKELY, R. H. BATTERSBY, James FITZPATRICK, Thomas FITZSIMONDS, S. KENNEDY, H. O’REILLY, A. O’REILLY, Edward PLUNKETT, and J. L.(?) MATER(?), Esqrs.
State of the house – Remaining last week, 471; admitted, 6; discharged, 21; died, 2; remaining, 454; general average cost, 1s. 8d.; in infirmary, 2s. 3d., in fever hospital, 2s. 6d.
Treasurer’s account – Received during the week, 0£ 0s. 0d.; paid, 47£ 17s. 6d.; balance in favour of guardians, 676£ 12s. 4d.
The ordinary business of the board having been transmitted, it was moved by Thomas BATTERSBY, Esq., seconded by Henry SARGENT< Esq.:
"That the Poor Law Commissioners be requested to increase the salary of Doctor ATKIN, the medical officer of Virginia dispensary district from 60£ to 80£ per annum"
The motion was put and carried (only one member dissenting).
BAILIEBOROUGH UNION – MONDAY, July 23.
The usual weekly meeting of the guardians of the above union was held to-day, in the board-room of the union workhouse.
Thomas CHAMBERS, Esq., in the chair.
Other guardians present – Messrs R. TAYLOR, E. BLOOMER, J. RYDER, J. WARD, and Thomas LYNCH.
The minutes of last meeting were read and signed.
STATE OF THE HOUSE.
Total number of paupers, on Saturday, the 14th instant, 136; admitted since 5; discharged 6; died 0; born 0. Total paupers in the house on Saturday, the 21st, 155; cost of necessaries and provision consumed during the week 15£ 8s. 6d. ; weekly average cost of each inmate 1s, 9d.; do. in infirmary 2s. 3d.
TREASURER’S ACCOUNT.
Received during the week 0£; paid 0£; balance on hand in favour of the union 1284£ 3s. 8d.
The following letter, from his Excellency to the Lord Lieutenant, was read, in reply to the memorial addressed to him by the board of guardians on the 11th ult.
His Excellency’s letter having been addressed to the presiding chairman of the day, who mistook it for a private communication, instead of the clerk of the union, its publication was unavoidably delayed to the present time.
"Dublin Castle, 25th June, 1855.
SIR – I am directed by the Lord Lieutenant to acknowledge the receipt of a memorial from the board of guardians of the Bailieborough Union, dated the 3th(sic) inst., relating to the Roman Catholic chaplaincy of the workhouse of that union; and, I am directed to inform you, in reply, that his Excellency has made inquiry and received a report from the Poor-law Commissioners; but under all the circumstances of the case, his Excellency does not feel called upon to interfere with the discretion vested by the law in the poor-law Commissioners."
"I am, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Thomas A. LARCOM."Joseph O’REILLY, Esq., presiding chairman
of the board of guardians of Bailieborough union.The following letter from the Poor-law Commissioners was read: --
Poor Law Commission Office,
Dublin, 14th July, 1855.
No. 19.762-1855.SIR – The Commissioners for administering the laws for the relief of the Poor in Ireland, have had before them a minute contained in minutes of proceedings of the board of guardians of the Bailieboro’ manor(?), on the 9th inst., directing that a statement relating to the salary and appointment of a Roman Catholic chaplain to the workhouse, which was submitted to the board, be forwarded to the Commissioners, and they have received and had the statement referred to under consideration.
In the statement in question reference is made to the application made to the commissioners by the board of guardians, at the time of the appointment of a successor to the Rev. Mr. O’REILLY, for a reduction in the amount of salary, and the commissioners find, on referring to the application, that the board of guardians grounded their application upon the great decrease in the number of the inmates of the workhouse, and the prospect that the improvement in the state of the union would be permanent. There were then between 500 and 600 persons in the workhouse, and it was decided that the Roman Catholic chaplain’s salary should be made 40£, the Protestant and Presbyterian chaplain’s salaries being 25£ each.
The Commissioners are not aware of the understanding referred to in the statement to the effect that the salary of 48£ was not again to be interfered with; on the contrary they received a letter from the Rev. Mr. M’QUAID at the time stating, that if at any future period the number of inmates of the workhouse should increase, he would expect an increase of salary. The number of workhouse inmates did not, however increase, but steadily continued to diminish, and in October last when the board of guardians took the subject of the salaries of the union officers into consideration the number in the workhouse was less than 100. The Commissioners accordingly proposed to make the Roman Catholic chaplain’s salary 35£ and afterwards 30£.
It is stated in the document appended to the minutes that the Commissioners overlooked part of the minute of the board of guardians of the 16th of October last, relating to the Roman Catholic chaplain’s salary, but this is in error as will be seen by reference to the Commissioners letter of the 21st Oct. to the board of guardians.
The Commissioners have given much consideration to the circumstances of the case, with every desire to meet the views and wishes of the board of guardians, the several members of which, as the Commissioners have before observed, appeared to be by no means unanimous upon the subject.
By order of the Commissioners,
WM. STANLEY, Secretary.
To the Clerk to the guardians
Of the Bailieborough Union.On the motion of Mr. WARD, the following reply was ordered to be forwarded to the Poor Law Commissioners in reference to the above letter: --
Referring to the letter of the Poor Law Commissioners, dated 14th July, 1855, No. 19 762 1865, the guardians desire to apprise the Commissioners that the statement appended to the minutes of the proceedings of the board of guardians on the 9th inst., relating to the salary and appointment of a Catholic chaplain to the workhouse, which, the Commissioners say, was submitted to the board of guardians, was not only submitted to them, but was unanimously adopted by the board.
The guardians do not dispute that the decrease in the number of inmates in the workhouse, at the time of the appointment of the late Catholic chaplain, was the ground upon which a reduction in his salary of 20£ a year from the amount paid to his predecessor was requested by the board of guardians; but, this being conceded, should not the same cause affect the salaries of other officers: The salary of no other officer, however, was disturbed until October, 1854, except the relieving officers; hence the cause of the understanding referred to in the statement appended to the minutes of the proceedings of the board on the 9th inst.
The guardians are unable to perceive that the letter stated by the Commissioners to have been addressed to them by th4e very Rev. M. M’QUAID, soliciting an advance to his salary, in the event of an increase occurring in the number of females of the workhouse can be considered to controvert the fact, as the Commissioners seem to think of the understanding in question having been entered into between the guardians. The guardians, moreover, are not aware that such understanding was ever communicated to the Very Rev. M. M’Quaid, who was no party whatever to it, the matter having been altogether an arrangement between the guardians themselves.
The Commissioners refer to their letter of the 21st October, 1854, to show that they did not "overlook" the resolution of the guardians of the 16th October, then current, fixing the salary of the Catholic chaplain at 40£. a year. The guardians admit they were in "error" when they stated that the Commissioners "overlooked" the resolution in question as reqards the late Catholic chaplain – it would have been more correct for the guardians to have stated that the Commissioners declined to sanction the part of that resolution which had reference to the salary of the Catholic chaplain. The Commissioners sanctioned the salary of Dr. ADAMS at sixty pounds a year, and the salary of Dr. TAYLOR at sixty pounds a year, the former a Protestant and the latter a Presbyterian in compliance with that resolution, but they declined to sanction the salary of the Catholic chaplain at forty pounds a year as contemplated by the same resolution. The guardians have besides to observe to the Commissioners that it would not be an "error" on their part to have stated to them that they did not "overlook" a resolution of the board of guardians, adopted on the 15th of January, 1855, by a majority of 5 to 3 votes, requesting the Commissioners to appoint a Catholic chaplain for this establishment, and fix his salary at forty pounds a year (vide notice of motion on minutes of proceedings in January, 1855); and although the guardians have many cases to acknowledge in which the Commissioners very courteously and promptly complied with the wishes and representations of the board, they are, nevertheless, compelled to state that the Commissioners have hitherto refused to so in the case of the Catholic chaplain.
A petition to the House of Commons was also agreed to. We will publish it next week.
SITUATION WANTED.
A MAN well acquainted with Farming in its various branches would be glad to obtain employment, or he would undertake the collecting of accounts, &c. The utmost satisfaction will be given as to character and competency, and he will give whatever security may be required.
Please address to M. J. at the Anglo-Celt Office, or 5, Great Clarence-street, Dublin.
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMISSIONERS
FOR SALE OF INCUMBERED ESTATES
IN IRELAND.COUNTY OF LEITRIM.
In the Matter of the
ESTATE OF JOHN FITZPATRICK,
Owner;RICHARD JOHN HINDS, Esq.,
Petitioner.The Commissioners will, on FRIDAY, the 23rd day of NOVEMBER next, at the hour of 12 o’Clock at Noon, at their Court, Henrietta-street, in the City of Dublin,
SELL BY AUCTION, IN ONE LOT,
The LANDS of Corran, Kankell, and Drumdoo, situate in the Parish of Cloone, Barony of Mohill, and
COUNTY OF LEITRIM,Containing 287a. 2r. 6p. STATUTE MEASURE, HELD IN Fee Farm, and producing a yearly rent of 120£, 9s. 5d. sterling, subject primarily to the yearly rent of 22£ 3s. 1d.; also an annuity of 36£ 18s. 5 ½ d. for the life of a lady aged about 70 years, and also subject to 11£ 3s. 1d. yearly rent-charge.
These Lands are held for ever under a Fee Farm grant, bearing date the 13th day of August, 1753, together with other LANDS called Gortacleary. They are situate within three miles of the town of Mohill, a good business town; in which are held excellent weekly markets, and 15 fairs yearly.
Dated this 20th day of July, 1855,
JOHN LOCKE, Auction Clerk.Proposals for the purchase of this Estate will be received up to the last day of November, 1855, and not afterwards and will be submitted to the Commissioners for their approbation.
For Rentals and further particulars apply at the Office of the Commissioners, No. 14, Henrietta-street, Dublin, or to
THOMAS CARMICHAEL, Solicitor for the Petitioner,
Having carriage of the Sale, 7, Upper Temple-street, Dublin.
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMISSIONERS
FOR THE SALE OF INCUMBERED ESTATES
IN IRELAND.COUNTY OF FERMANAGH.
In the Matter of the
ESTATE of the Rev. CHARLES MAYNE,
CLERK,
Owner and Petitioner.The Commissioners will, on THURSDAY, the 22d day OF November, 1855, at the hour of Twelve o’Clock, at Noon, at their Court, No. 14, Henrietta-street, Dublin, SELL BY PUBLIC AUCTION, in the following 5 Lots – the CARA AND CORRAGHY ESTATES – situate in the Barony of Clonkelly, and COUNTY OF FERMANAGH, held in fee simple, viz.
Lot 1. – The Lands of Derrygoan, Clongowna, Derrybrack, and Rabbit Island, containing 305A. 1R. 24r. statute measure, producing the Nett Yearly Rent of 267£ 0s. 8d., including 100£ a year, the estimated value of the Bog. Held by tenants from year to year.
Lot 2. – The Lands of Tievegarrow, Derrynure, Sheepwalk, Cloneloghy, and Cloncorick, containing 417A. 3R. 27r. statute measure, producing the Nett yearly Rent of 437£ 0s. 2d., including 200£ a year, the estimated value of the Bog. Held by tenants from year to year.
Lot 3. – The Lands of Lukaghy, Moleena, and part of Clonfad, containing 207A. 1R. 21P. statute measure, producing the Nett Yearly Rent of 116£ 0s. 8d., including 24£ a year, the estimated value of the Bog. Held by tenants from year to year.
Lot 4. – the House and Demesne of Cara, and parts of Clonfad, containing 308A. 3R. 19r. statute measure, producing the Nett Yearly Rent of 116V 10s. 2d., held by tenants for lives renewable for ever.
Lot 5r, -- The Corraghy Estate, containing 564 A. 1R. 21P. statute measure, including Mountain, producing the Nett Yearly Rent of 109£, 15s. 6d., held by tenants on lease – three for one life, one for two lives, and the remainder from year to year.
Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 are subject to a Chief Rent of 4£ 4s. 8d. per annum. Lot 4 will be sold subject, exclusively, to this Chief Rent in exoneration of the other Lots charged therewith.
Dated this 12th day of July, 1855.
JOHN LOCKE, Auction Clerk.
The Cara Estate, comprising Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, is situate on the post road leading from Clones to Belturbet and Cavan, and from Clones to Redhills, within two miles of Clones (by which town the Dundalk and Enniskillen Railway passes0. The Ulster Canal runs through the Estate, thus affording water communication to Belfast, Armagh, and Newry, on the North – and on the South and West by Belturbet, Ballinamore, Carrick-on Shannon (via the Shannon) to Limerick, &c. This Estate is remarkably and favourably situated, and the Land of prime quality, producing wheat, flax, and oats. The holdings are generally large, and the tenants of a respectable class. Good roads intersect the property most conveniently.
The Corraghy Estate is situate on the great road leading from Clones to five mile Town, in the parish of Clones, Barony of Clonkelly, and County of Fermanagh. The Mountain part of the Townland could be easily reclaimed and brought into cultivation, and is at present good feeding ground for young cattle.
For Rentals and particulars, apply to the Office of the Commissioners, No. 14, Henrietta-street, Dublin;
Messrs. SAMUEL S. and EDWARD REEVES,
Solicitors having Carriage of Sale, No. 22, Merrion-square, South, Dublin; and
RICHARD MAINE, Esq., the Agent of the
Property, Glynch House, Newbliss, County Monaghan.
COUNTY OF CAVAN
NOTICE is hereby given, that in pursuance of the Act 13th and 14th Vic., chapter 69, section 21, I have caused to be posted up at the undermentioned Places and Police Stations, Alphabetical Lists of all Persons now registered pursuant to said Act; and I have also caused to be posted Supplemental Lists of all Male Persons rated in the last Rate (-----) as the Occupier of any Lands, Tenements, Hereditaments, situate in each Barony or Division of a Barony, of a nett annual value of £12 or upwards, who have on or before the 1st day of July, in this Present Year, paid all Poor Rates (if any) which shall have become payable by him in respect of such Premises, previously to the 1st day of January last, as returned to me by the Clerk of each Poor Law Union, situate wholly or in part within said County. All which Lists remain to be perused by any person without payment of any fee, at any time, between the hours of 10 of the Clock in the Forenoon and 1 of the Clock in the Afternoon of any day except Sundays, during the first 14 days after the same has been Published; and I hereby inform all Persons, that Copies of such Lists of Registered Voters and Supplemental List, or either of them, may be had on application to Mr. P. CAFFREY, at my Office, Court-house, Cavan (all communications, if by post, to be pre-paid), on payment of a price for each Copy, according to the Rate contained in the Schedule (C) to the Act annexed, a Copy of which Schedule I have also caused to be posted with these Lists.
Police States and Places at which Lists and Notices are Posted for the respective Baronies.
Given under my hand, this 20th day of July, 1855.
POLICE STATIONS. PLACES. BARONIES. Ballyjamesduff,
Kilnaleck,
Mullagh,
Virginia,Ballyjamesduff Petty Sessions Room Castleraghan. Ballinagh,
Crossdoney,
Capragh,
Dundevan,
Mountnugent,Ballinagh Petty Sessions Room Clonmahon. Bailieborough,
Corraneary,
Grousehall,
Kingscourt,
Shercock,Bailieborough Court House Clonkee. Ballyhaise,
Butlersbridge,
Cavan,
Corratubber,
Crosskeys,
Farnham,
Stradone.Cavan Court-house Upper Loughtee. Belturbet,
Cloverhill,
Miltown,Belturbet Petty Sessions Room. Town Hall. Lower Loughtee. Cootehill,
Redhills,
Tullyvin,
Stradone,
Grousehall,Cootehill Sessions House Tullygarvey. Arva,
Ardlogher,
Killeshandra,
Killygorman,
Lossett,
Scrabby,Killeshandra Petty Sessions Room Tullyhunco. Blacklion,
Brackley,
Ballyconnell,
Ballymagauran,
Glann,
Swanlinbar,Ballyconnell Sessions House, Killyglasson Petty Sessions Room. Tullyhaw.
GUSTAVUS TUITE DALTON
Clerk of the Peace, County Cavan.
PARLLIAMENTARY VOTERS (IRELAND). – No. 8
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY THE CLERK OF THE PEACE IN ALL YEARS AFTER 1851,
TO CLAIMS TO VOTE.C O U N T Y O F C A V A N.
I HEREBY GIVE NOTICE, that all persons entitled to vote in the Election of a Knight, or Knights of the Shire for the County of Cavan, in respect of any property situate wholly or in part within any Barony of this County, who shall not be on the Supplemental List of Ratepayers for such Barony, and are not upon the Register of Voters now in force (relating to such Barony), or who being upon the Register shall not retain the same qualification or continue in the same place of abode as described in such Register of Voters about to be made for the said County, are hereby required to give or send to me at my Office, on or before the Fourth Day of August in this year, a notice in writing, by them signed, in which their Name and Surname at full length, their place of Abode, and the particulars of their qualification, must be legibly written, according to the Form (No. 0) hereunder set forth. Any person who is upon the present Register may also make his claim, if he thinks fit; but it is not necessary that he should do so if he has the same qualification and place of abode as now described in the Register.
Dated this 20th day of July, in the Year 1855.
GUSTAVUS TUITE DALTON,
Clerk of the Peace of the County of Cavan
No. 9. – Form of a Notice of Claim to be given to the Clerk of the Peace in all years after 1851.
Barony of ___________________________
To the Clerk of the Peace of the County of Cavan.I hereby give you Notice, that I claim to be inserted in the List for this Barony of Voters for the County of Cavan, and that the particulars of my place of abode and qualification are stated in the columns below.
Dated the day of in the Year
Signed, ____________________________
Christian Name and Surname
Of the
Claimant at full length.Place
of
Abode.Nature
and Amount of
Qualification.Townland or Denomination, Street, Lane or other like Place in this Barony, and Number of House if any, where the Property is situate, or Name of the Property, or Name of the occupying Tenant, if any, or if the Qualification consist of a Rent-charge, then the Names of the Owners of the Property out of which such Rent is issuing, or some of them, and the situation of the property.
CAVAN UNION.
ARVAGH DISPENSARY DISTRICT.THE Committee of Management will, on FRIDAY, the 3rd of August next, at ARVAGH, appoint a duly qualified MEDICAL OFFICER to the above district
AT A SALARY of £45 PER ANNUM.
Proposals with testimonials will be received by the Honorary Secretary at Arvagh, up to 11 o’Clock on the above date.
Applications in person or by Post prepaid, shall be impartially and carefully attended to.
The person elected must reside in the town of Arvagh, and if qualified for the compounding and sale of medicine would be preferred.
By order,
WILLIAM NORTON,
Honorary Secretary.
Committee Room, 7th July, 1855.
GRANARD UNION.
MEDICAL OFFICER WANTED.
THE Committee of Management of Scrabby Dispensary district will, at their meeting to be held on the 4th Day of August next, at the Committee Rooms, Scrabby, receive proposals from Duly Qualified persons to fill the situation now vacant by the resignation of the former medical officer.
The Salary is fixed at £75per Annum, and the person appointed must reside in Scrabby or in the immediate vicinity.
Candidates to be in attendance on the day of appointment, and to be prepared to produce such testimonials as the regulations of the Commissioners requires.
Applications to be addressed to John BEATTY, Esq., Lisiney(?), Honorary Secretary of the Committee, and which will be received on any day up to 12 o’Clock on the 4th day of August next.
JOHN BEATTY,
Honorary Secretary,
Liminey, 16th July, 1855.
GRANARD UNION
BAKER WANTED.
THE Guardians of the Granard Union will, on THURSDAY, the 2nd of August next, proceed to appoint a
B A K E R
To the Workhouse; salary to be fixed at 14s. per week.
Applications to be in with me on or before 11 o’clock on the 2nd August as above.
By order.
B. M’MANUS,
Clerk of the Union.
Board room, Granard, July 25, 1855.
CAVAN UNION.
THE Board of Guardians of the Cavan Union will, on TUESDAY, the 7th of August next receive proposals from properly qualified persons to collect the Poor Rates on Ballinagh and Stradone District.
The fees on the collection are fixed at six pence in the pound for all duties connected with the Office.
Persons proposing for the Office to state in their proposals the names of two Solvent Sureties willing to join in a Bond for the due fulfillment of the duties of the officer.
Applications with Testimonials will be received by me up to Eleven o’Clock on the above date.
By order,
BLAYNEY GRIER.
Clerk of the Union.
Board Room, 26th July, 1855.
FARM TO BE SOLD.
A FARM containing about 25 Acres of Prime LAND, with a sufficient quantity of Turbary attached to it; it is situated in a peaceable country, about a mile from Belturbet; the crops now pruning thereon would be sold to the purchaser of the land at a valuation, it is held for one life or twenty-one years, yet to come.
Application to Samuel N. KNIPE, Esq., Solicitor, Belturbet, or Mr. J. MORTON, Lanesborough Arms, Belturbet.
ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE,
SANDHURST.
AT the late Examinations on the 5th July, and those immediately preceding, in June and May, the following Gentlemen, Pupils of the UNIVERSITY AND MILITARY INSTITUTION, Dublin, passed, on the most distinguished answering, for Commissions in her Majesty’s Army.
The principal, Mr. DUNBAR, late Scholar, &c., of Trinity College, would, in justice to his Pupils and to himself, repeat that this extraordinary and continuously increasing success, on the part of all his Pupils, has never, it is believed, been equalled by any similar Institution in the Empire.
Lieutenant William J. MASSY, South Tipperary Artillery.
Mr. Alfred STOKES, Trinity Collect, 2 Cullenswood Avenue.
Mr. Wm. De Moleyns BLENNERHASETTE, Tralee.
Mr. Robert Fannis STONY, Portland House, Boerfsokane(?).
Mr. Leslie James DAY, Tralee.
Mr. Conyngham J. BAKAS, Betherstown Castle, Waterford.
Mr. John PAYNE, 1st Royal Regiment of Foot, Ennis.
Mr. Robert CUMING, 53d (52d?) Regiment, Armagh.
Mr. Edward BOYLE, 69th Regiment, Trinity College.
Mr. W. T. M’GRATH, 40th Regiment, Trinity College.
Mr. C. A. LOGAN, 1st Royal Regiment of Foot, Ardee.
Mr. R. E. SPROULE, 63d Regiment, late Tyrone Fusillers.
M. E. C. LAVERY, 34th Regiment, Ballinderry, County Antrim.Not only has no Military Pupil of Mr. DUNBAR’s ever failed (even by accident) on "first arrival" at Sandhurst, Woolwich, or Addiscombe, but the majority have scarcely failed to answe4r almost every question proposed, and (with two exceptions merely) have all passed on "highest marks" in every subject of Examination.
These are the most unequivocal proofs of the vast superiority of the system of Education pursued in the "University and Military Institution," and of the unwearied diligence and care with which Mr. DUNBAR endeavours to promote the best interests of his Pupils.
Mr. DUNBAR declines all responsibility for the failure of Pupils who, without his sanction, may repost themselves ready for examination; as also for those who, placed under his Tuition, may be irregular in their attendance, or inattentive to his instructions.
In the Third Annual report of this institution it is intended to print in the full names and addresses of all the pupils (considerably exceeding 100 in number) who have distinguished themselves in Trinity College, Dublin, and in all the several Military Colleges.
The University Classes are conducted quite separately from the Military Department.
In compliance with the repeated desire of Gentlemen who prefer that their sons should be boarders, and also to meet generally the requirements of his increasing number of :Pupils, Mr. DUNBAR has taken, and is, at a very considerable outlay, fitting up the adjoining house for their accommodation.
Terms (Invariably in Advance.)
An additional Guinea monthly (without any reduction for subsequent months) is charged to Candidates preparing for the "Open Appointments" to India, and to the Royal Engineers and Artillery, (for whose efficient preparation every arrangement has been made); also to all other Pupils who may remain for one month only.
DAY PUPILS Monthly 2 Guineas Quarterly 5 Guineas Half Yearly 9 Guineas BOARDERS. Monthly 6 Guineas Quarterly 16 (10?) Guineas Half Yearly 30 Guineas Application from Boarders to be made Mr. DUNBAR, Nos. 9 and 10 Talbot Place, Dublin, as long as possible beforehand.
County Cavan Newspaper Transcription Project
IMPORTANT NOTICE: All rights to the pages found within this site are retained by the original submitter of the information. Pages may be printed or copied for personal use only. They may NOT be reproduced in any form in whole or in part by any individual or organization for profit.