Cavan Observer
Published in Cavan, county Cavan
June 7, 1862
CAVAN SOLICITOR
Mr. Thomas ARDILL has been appointed Cavan Solicitor for Longford and Cavan, in the room of Mr. Edward GEALE, who has been appointed to the Crown Solicitorship of the county Dublin.
LANDS SOLD
In the Landed Estates Court, Dublin (before Judge DOBBS), on Thursday, the 29th ultimo, the following lands--the estate of Thomas Sneyd WALLACE, owners; W. O'Brien ADAMS, petitioner--were put up for competition:--Carryvillyranahan, in the county of Cavan, held under an agreement for a lease for ever, containing 211 a; profit rent, £147. Sold to Mr. MADDEN, in trust, for £2,500. Solicitor--Mr. John REILLY.
CAVAN PETTY SESSIONS--MONDAY
Magistrates present:--Theophilus Thompson, Esq., Chairman; Nathaniel Montgomery, Esq., Robt. Erskine, Esq. and Captain Carden.
Thomas GALLIGAN and William RAMSAY were each fined 6d and costs--the former for having allowed two cows, and the latter a horse, to wander on the public road.
Thomas BROWN was summoned for having allowed his cow to wander on the public road at Drumkeeran, on Saturday last.
Captain Carden said that, although defendant kept a cow and horse, he had no land except a small garden, and for the last three years he was in the habit of grazing his horse and cow on the public road, and, of late, upon the railway. His (Captain Carden's) fences were destroyed by the constant trespassing of defendant's cow, and his cattle were constantly endangered by following the defendant's cow on to the railway. He spoke to defendant repeatedly on the subject, and received a promise from him that he would sell the cow. Defendant did sell one cow, but on the same day he bought another. He had no wish to have the defendant fined if he promised not to allow his cow to trespass on his land or on the railway.
Defendant said he was after purchasing the grass along a mile of the railway slopes, and would not allow his cow to trespass on the railway or Captain Carden's land in future.
The summons was then "nilled," but the danger of allowing cattle to trespass on the railway was very forcibly pointed out to defendant by the Chairman.
There were no other cases except a few claims for small debts.
BALLYHAISE POST OFFICE
During the recent illness of Mr. Laurence KENNEDY, of Ballyhaise, Mr. John PRUNTY received the temporary charge of the post office of that town. After his recovery Mr. KENNEDY, being about to retire from business, resigned the situation of Postmaster, which he had held for several years, to the satisfaction of the authorities and the public. The Lords of the Treasury have appointed as his successor Mr. Henry NESBITT, P.L.G, Ballyhaise...
CRIMINAL ASSAULT
On last Sunday night two men named James M'DONNELL, of Derry(?), and John ROONY, of Tunker, were arrested by the Belturbet Constabulary, on a warrant granted by John ROGERS, Esq., J.P., on the information of a girl named POGUE, from Castlesaunderson, who charged them with having committed a criminal assault upon her, at about one o'clock on the previous day (Saturday). POGUE's father is a labourer in the employment of Edward SAUNDERSON, Esq., J.P., Castlesaunderson; the accused were also working for him, but at a different of the land; and the girl was passing with her father's dinner when the alleged assault was committed. The accused have been admitted to bail. The case will be heard at the Belturbet Petty Sessions to-day.
BIRTHS
On Saturday last, the wife of Mr. John M'CABE, Cavan, of a son.
On Wednesday last, the wife of Mr. Jas. BRADY, Cavan, of a son.
June 14, 1862
TO PRINTERS, POLICE CONSTABLES, &c.
£1 REWARD
WHEREAS EDWARD SHERIDAN, a native of Cavan and Indentured Apprentice of the Proprietor of the CAVAN OBSERVER, has absconded from this town, in company with the undermentioned Joseph WILSON, a Reward of£1 will be given to any Constable, or other person, who shall give such information as will lead to his apprehension. Master Printers are cautioned against employing him. A Warrant for his apprehension is in the hands of the Head Constable of Cavan.
DESCRIPTION OF EDWARD SHERIDAN.
Age--about seventeen years; height, 5 fee 3½ inches; light complexion, and brown hair. Wore a dark coat, tweed trousers, and "Albert" boots when last seen.
£1 REWARD
WHEREAS JOSEPH WILSON, an indentured apprentice of mine, has absconded without my permission, I hereby offer a Reward of £1 to any Constable, or other persons or persons, who shall give such information as will lead to his apprehension. And I hereby caution all Master Printers against employing the said Joseph WILSON.
DESCRIPTION OF JOSEPH WILSON
About 20 years of age, 5 fee 7 inches high, slight make, fair complexion, rather long nose, eyebrows extended across the bridge of his nose; was dressed in Greenish Tweed. He is supposed to be about Liverpool, where his mother is a nurse or schoolmistress.
JOHN FEGAN, Printer, Bookseller, and Stationer
19, Main street, Cavan
COUNTY OF CAVAN
DIVISION OF COOTEHILL
A LIST of Applications received by the Clerk of the Peace from Persons seeking EXCISE LICENSES for the Sale of BEER, SPIRITS, &c/////
On Thursday, the 26th day of June, 1862;
immediately after the Grand Jury shall have been Sworn:--
Name Residence Parish Barony 1 CASSIDY, Edward Kingscourt Enniskeen Clonkee 2. CLARKE, Patrick Shercock Shercock Clonkee 3. FOY, John Bridge Street, Cootehill Drumgoon Tullygarvey 4. HANRATTY, Thomas Market Street, Bailieborough Bailieborough Clonkee 5. MARKEY, Patrick Market Street, Cootehill Drumgoon Tullygarvey 6. RICE, John Market Street, Cootehill Drumgoon Tullygarvey 7. SHERA, John Market Street, Cootehill Drumgoon Tullygarvey GUSTAVUS TUITE DALTON, Clerk of the Peace, County Cavan
Cavan, 7th June, 1862
BELTURBET PETTY SESSIONS--SATURDAY
Magistrates present:-Captain Nesbitt, Chairman; Thomas F. Knipe and John Rogers, Esqrs.
CIVIL BILLS
James DOLAN, of Redhills, processed Francis SHERIDAN, of Redhills, for the sum of 14s, amount of shop goods sold by plaintiff to defendant. The defendant did not appear. A decree was granted with costs.
William ARMSTRONG, Belturbet, processed Thomas M'CAULEY for £1 5s 6½d, for shop goods. No appearance on the part of defendant. Decree, with costs.
TURF STEALING
Rev. Andrew M'CREIGHT summoned Jane CONWAY and Rose M'PARTLAND, both of Belturbet, for trespassing on his bog at Drumacon, and stealing therefrom two "creels" of turf. Two of complainant's servants proved the case. Neither of defendants appeared, but as they had been committed for a week each on a similar charge in the month of April last, the Court ordered them to be imprisoned for 14 days each.
CARTS
Acting Constable Michael DUFFY summoned John FITZPATRICK, of Curlaghaloo, and Phillip KIERNAN, of Ardlogher, for not having their names on their carts. No defence was offered and it being the first offence, a fine of 6d and costs was imposed on each defendant.
WAYLAY AND ASSAULT
James FARRELLY, of Kilnaglan--who stood out on bail--appeared to answer the above charge on the informations of Hugh DONOGHOE, of Dernagord. It appeared that FARRELLY and a man named Patrick CASSIDY, had committed an assault on DONOGHOE. Informations were taken and the defendant was arrested and admitted to bail to appear at the Petty Sessions on this day. DONOGHOE did not attend to prosecute, and FARRELLY was discharged for the present--DONOGHOE's recognizances to be estreated (sic).
CRIMINAL ASSAULT
It being known that the following case was to be investigated before the magistrates at Petty Sessions the Town Hall was crowded to excess. However, the magistrates disappointed the prurient curiosity of the assemblage by giving an order to the constabulary to have the Court cleared. After some difficulty the order was executed, after which the case was proceeded with:--
Alice POGUE v. Hugh M'DONALD and John ROONEY
Mr. Samuel N. Knipe appeared for the prosecutrix, and Mr. John Armstrong for the accused.
Mr. Knipe stated the case at great length, after which Alice POGUE was sworn.
Mr. Armstrong applied to have any other witness who might be called removed. The mother of the witness was then sent into an adjoining room. Witness then deposed that she lives at Derryhoo with her father and mother; on Saturday, 30th May, went with her father's dinner about 1 o'clock; he was working in the bog at Castlesaunderson; saw the prisoners on the Pass when she was going; they were working; only waited while her father was eating his dinner; when returning the prisoners were at the gap (the place is called the Race Course); it is on the Castlesaunderson demesne. The prosecutrix then stated the particulars of the assault, which are unfit for publication. The entire assault was committed by M'DONALD, and ROONEY took no part in it--neither did he endeavour to rescue her from her assailant.
The prosecutrix was ably cross examined by Mr. Armstrong, but did not vary from her direct testimony.
Jane POGUE, the mother of the prosecutrix, was then examined by Mr. Knipe, and corroborated the account given by prosecutrix of her appearance after the assault. She was also cross examined by Mr. Armstrong, after which the case for the prosecution closed.
Mr. Armstrong then addressed the Court on behalf of the accused, calling upon them to dismiss the charge against ROONEY, who took no part in the assault. He would reserve M'DONALD's defence in case they were determined to send him for trial.
The Chairman, after some consultation with the other magistrates, said that they had decided on sending the case for trial. He, for one, would accept of no bail for M'DONALD.
Mr. Armstrong said that it was a bailable case, and hoped the Bench would not prejudge it at that stage, and oppress the accused by incarceration before he was found guilty. After some further observations bail was accepted for M'DONALD--two sureties in £25 each, and himself in £50; for ROONEY, two sureties in £5 each, and himself in £10.
On the prosecutrix leaving the Court a stone was thrown at her by a man named CONNOLLY. He was arrested and brought before the Bench, and fined 5s; or 48 hours imprisonment--with a caution.
The Court then adjourned.
EXCURSION
On Tuesday last the students of the Kilmore (Roman Catholic) Diocesan Seminary, Cavan, to the number of 106, enjoyed their annual excursion. They left Cavan by the 11:40 train, and proceeded to Clones, on the recently complete branch line of the Dundalk and Enniskillen Company. They were accompanied by the heads of the seminary--the Rev. Phillip O'CONNELL, the Rev. Patrick MAGINNES, the Rev. Bernard FINNEGAN, and Mr. John M'CABE. The Right Rev. Dr. BRADY, Rev. Michael O'REILLY, and some others of the local Roman Catholic clergymen, also accompanied them. At the Clones station they were met by the Rev. Mr. HERBERT and ______O'REILLY, Esq., M.D., by whom they were conducted to a pretty little villa, the property of Mr. BRADY, Manager of the Northern Bank, Clones, at Johnstown, about two and a quarter miles from the town, where a capital dinner was provided for them, after which the young excursionists amused themselves in the ornamental grounds attached to the villa, until their return by the 6 p.m. train to Cavan.
INQUEST
An inquest was held on Monday evening, at the County infirmary, before William POLLOCK, Esq., coroner, and a respectable jury, on the body of a man named John MAHON, who died in the infirmary on the previous evening. MAHON had been working at a bog at Keadue, for a man named JOHNSTONE, on the 2nd instant. JOHNSTONE, MAHON, and another man, were taking dinner in the bog, when, it appears JOHNSTONE struck his bottle, which had contained milk, against MAHON's bottle, through playfulness. The bottle broke, and a piece of it struck MAHON in the leg, inflicting a deep punctured wound. He was at once conveyed to the infirmary, where he acquitted JOHNSTONE of all blame. The hemorrhage from the wound was, however, so great, that notwithstanding the skill and attention of Doctors MEASE and MATTHEWS, the poor fellow gradually sank until Sunday evening, when he expired. The jury returned a verdict that "Deceased came to his death by an accidental cut on the leg from a large piece of broken bottle."
CAVAN PETTY SESSIONS--MONDAY
Magistrates present:--William Babington, Esq., Chairman; Robert Erskine, Esq., Captain Phillips, and Captain Cuming.
Charles SMITH, Michael SMITH, and Pat. CUSACK were each fined 6d and costs for allowing cattle to wander on the public road.
James MOONY and John CONNOR, privates in the Cavan Militia, were charged with having absented themselves from the last training of that regiment in June 1861. Adjutant GOSSELIN stated that the prisoners bore excellent characters when with the regiment, and that they had come in voluntarily to attend the present training. MOONY, who has been in the regiment nearly four years, produced a medical certificate to show that he was sick at the time of last training. CONNOR has served nearly the full term of five years; he was in Scotland in June, 1861, and being out of employment in consequence of having injured his hand at one of the factories, was unable to come to Ireland. Fortunately for the prisoners, their case did not come under the late Act, the lowest penalty under it being two months' imprisonment, and in consequence of the extenuating circumstances, they were let off on payment of a fine of 1s each.
A private in the Cavan Militia, named SHIELDS, summoned Anthony HAUGHTON for an assault, and "Tony," who was represented by Mr. John Armstrong, preferred a similar charge against SHIELDS. Tony was going home, in company with his mother's servant girl, who had been milking the cows, when SHIELDS jestingly inquired of the girl if she were not "afraid to walk with that young man" (Tony), or words to that effect. Tony, offended at this inquiry, struck SHIELDS with a heavy stick, upon which SHIELDS took the stick from him, and struck him a very severe blow on the head with it, after which he gave the stick to the police. Both cases were dismissed.
A woman of improper character, named DOLAN, was sentenced to a month's imprisonment for a violent assault on a man who went with the Town Sergeant to demolish the huts on the Fair Green, in accordance with the directions of the Town Commissioners.
Mr. Thos. REILLY, of Derragarra, had summonses against the Dundalk and Enniskillen Railway Company relative to the fencing of a portion of their line between Cavan and Clones. Mr. Walter BOYD appeared on behalf of the company. The main facts of the cases were given in a recent issue
FOUND DROWNED
On Wednesday last the body of an old man named James BROWNE was found in the river at Rakenny, within one miles of Tullyvin. Life was entirely extinct, and the body must, from its appearance, have been in the water for several hours. When last seen alive, BROWNE was herding some cattle near where his body was subsequently found, and, as he was about eighty years of age, and rather feeble, it is probable that he had fallen into the water, and being unable to swim, thus lost his life, although our informant states that a rumour prevailed in the neighbourhood that the deceased's son, an idiot, had in some manner caused the catastrophe. An inquest was held on the body, but we have not heard what verdict the jury returned.
A couple of summonses for wages were the only other cases before the Court.
DEATH BY LIGHTNING--In the thunder storm, on Tuesday afternoon, a young woman named Mary TERRY, whilst weaving in the house where she resided, at Anahue, near Loughgall, was killed by lightning which appeared to have passed through the thatch, splintered a bed-post and a loom-post to a slight extent, but did no other injury to the premises. A slight mark, as of a bruise, on deceased's chest, was the only symptom of injury to her, the body presenting a natural appearance, except in being greatly swollen. An inquest was held on the following day by Edward D. ATKINSON, Esq., coroner, and a verdict in accordance with the facts was returned.--Newry Examiner.
June 21, 1862
CAVAN PETTY SESSIONS--MONDAY
Magistrates present:--Theophilus Thompson, Esq., J.P., Chairman; William Babington, Esq., Captain Carden, Captain Phillips, and John G. Tatlow, Esq.
ASSAULTS
Rose Anne GAVIN summoned John PLUNKETT and John M'GAHARAN for having assaulted her on the night of the 19th April (Easter Saturday).
Mr. John Armstrong appeared for complainant, ad Mr. Tully for defendants.
It may be remembered that on Easter Monday complainant's husband (then but a short time out of gaol for a similar offence) was charged with having struck PLUNKETT a dangerous blow on the head with a poker, or some such weapon, and was committed for trial, bail being accepted for his appearance. PLUNKETT was at that time a "ganger" on the railway between Cavan and Clones. GAVIN and M'GAHARAN were working as labourers under him. GAVIN, in order, as he alleges, to gain the goodwill of PLUNKETT, invited him to his house on Easter Saturday night, offered to have his shirts washed for him, free of expense, and made him a present of a knife worth 2s 8d. PLUNKETT accepted the invitation and went to GAVIN's house, accompanied by M'GAHARAN. GAVIN's version of the occurrence is that he merely interfered to protect his wife from an indecent and violent assault committed upon her by M'GAHARAN and PLUNKETT, after the former had several times challenged him to fight....The case was sent to trial to the Quarter Sessions, the accused being admitted to bail--themselves in £5, and two sureties in £2 10s each.
M'GAHARAN had a summons against GAVIN for having used violent threats towards him. A young man named Phillip REILLY proved that he heard GAVIN threaten to "put a knife in M'GAHARAN on the first opportunity:" and M'GAHARAN swore that he was apprehensive GAVIN would do him some serious injury, if not restrained. GAVIN was ordered to find bail to keep the peace--himself in the sum of £5, and two sureties in £2 10 each.
Patrick M'CABE, a private in the Cavan Militia, was charged with having assaulted David REID and John HARRIS. Mr. REID one of the complainants, said that neither he nor Mr. HARRIS wished to press the case, as defendant was very sorry for what he had done. They had refused to compromise the case without the sanction of the Court; but he trusted the Court would not allow the charge to be withdrawn, and dismiss the defendant with such a reprimand (illegible)....Defendant's conduct had been extremely violent; but as he had previously borne a good character, expressed sorrow for his offence, and promised to avoid drunkenness in future, he was only fined 5s.
A man named M'CABE had a young man named RAHILL, and three or four others summoned for attacking his house at Shantamon....The prosecutor was unable to sustain the charge, which was accordingly dismissed.
John MURPHY was charged with having fraudulently enlisted in the Royal Meath Militia, under the name of John GOLHICK, on the 27th November, 1861--he having been previously enrolled in the Cavan Militia. A Sergeant of the Meath Militia proved the case. It turned out, however, that the prisoner's declaration paper was informal; it was unstamped, and signed by Mr. John MULLEN, Chairman of the Navan Town Commissioner, instead of by a county magistrate. The case was accordingly dismissed.
John TALBOT, James MOORE, John CASSIDY, James M'DONNELL, and Patrick REILLY were charged with having been present at a cockfight, at Behy, on the 2nd inst; and James GALLAGHER was charged with having allowed his field to be occupied for the purpose of cockfighting. Several witnesses--one or two of whom gave their evidence in a very equivocating manner--proved the cases. Mr. John Armstrong appeared for the defendants, and contended that by the Act 12 and 13 Vic.....under which the cases were brought, the charge against GALLAGHER should be dismissed, unless it could be proved that his field was used as a cockpit with his knowledge and concurrence, and it was ordinarily used as a cockpit, and that he received money for such use of it; and no evidence on these points had been given. On the same grounds he claimed to have the other cases dismissed, for unless GALLAGHER was convicted, the charges against the other defendants could not be sustained. In support of his arguments, Mr. Armstrong cited a decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, England, and the Court of Common Pleas, Ireland. The cases occupied a very long time, and the Court finally resolved to submit the points raised by Mr. Armstrong for the decision of the Law Adviser. The cases were accordingly postponed until next Court day.
The remaining cases were of a trifling nature.
BELTURBET PETTY SESSIONS--SATURDAY
Magistrates present:--Captain Nesbitt, in the chair; John Rogers and T. F. Knipe, Esqrs.
Mr. John REA summoned Thomas CALLOVIN, of Kilduff, for allowing two cows to trespass on his meadow. Defendant raised three separate defences--first, that it was not on meadow land the cows trespassed; second, that the trespass was caused by complainant's own neglect, in not having proper fences; and third, that the land on which the cattle trespassed did not belong to complainant. These defences were not sustained, and defendant was fined 2s and costs.
John LAWLOR, of Keeny, summoned Mary FLANNIGAN, of same place for cruelly beating his cattle, and for "hunting" them with a dog. Complainant's wife proved the case. For the defence it was proved that the cattle had been trespassing upon the land of defendant's brother, and that she only used necessary violence to remove them. The case was dismissed.
Hugh DONAGHOO, of Derragora (the Court having at last Petty Sessions notified their intention of estreating his recognizances for not being in attendant) appeared to prosecute Pat. M'MANUS, Philip M'GUINN, Michael CASSIDY, Owen FARRELLY, and James M'GAHARAN, for a waylay and assault, at Kilconny, on the 29th ult. Warrants had been in the hand of the Constabulary from the date of the occurrence, but none of the defendants could be made amenable. However, on the case being called, M'MANUS, M'GUINN, and CASSIDY appeared. They were defended by Mr. S. N. Knipe, the depositions made by DONAGHOO immediately after the occurrence were read over to him. In these all the parties above named were identified as having taken part in the assault. DONAGHOO, however, now seemed to have almost forgotten the occurrence, and it was only "to the best of his skill and knowledge" he could give any information on a subject about which he had sworn so positively at first. The Bench discharged the accused, and re-bound DONAGHOO to prosecute when called on.
The remaining cases were few, and not of much public interest.
SERIOUS ACCIDENT--On Wednesday last, as Thos. ATKINSON, a workman in the employment of Thomas F. Knipe, Esq., Belturbet, was in the act of loading a cart of turf at the Red Bog, the horse took fright, and ran off. ATKINSON, while endeavouring to stop the animal, a spirited young horse, was knocked down, and the wheel passed over his abdomen, injuring him very severely. He is lying in a precarious state.
June 28, 1862
CAVAN QUARTER SESSIONS
(The first three paragraphs are illegible)
Theophilus THOMPSON, Esq., J.P., then informed the Grand Jury that the Chairman was engaged in hearing income tax appeals, and had directed that they should be sworn in his absence. The bills would be given in charge to them, and they might retire to consider their findings.
The Grand Jury then retired to their room, and in about half a hour afterwards his worship entered Court, and took has seat upon the bench. The following magistrates assisted him in the discharge of business during the day:--Captain Carden, William Murray Hickson, Esq., R.M., William Babington, Theophilus Thompson, Nathaniel Montgomery, David Field Jones, Joseph Story, Robert Erskine, Esqrs.
The first business proceeded with, after the entrance of the Chairman, were the applications for spirit licenses. Some bills having been found by the Grand Jury, the Crown business was next gone into, and
Patrick NEALE and Daniel REILLY were indicted for having, at Derragarra, on the 22nd of April, 1862, unlawfully, maliciously, and wilfully thrown stones at a railway carriage traveling on the Cavan and Clones branch of the Dundalk, Enniskillen, and Londonderry Railway, thereby endangering the lives and safety of the persons travelling on said railway. The prisoners are very young lads. They were admitted to bail when the case was tried at the Cavan Petty Sessions, on which occasion we gave particulars of the case. They pleaded guilty, and NEALE, bursting into tears, stated, in reply to his worship that they did not think they were doing any harm in throwing the stones.
His Worship rebuked them for their conduct, stating that by it they might have murdered the parties then travelling on the railways. He then ordered them to be removed.
Patrick REILLY and James REILLY were then indicted for having on the 30th April, 1862, at Mullaboy, assaulted Peter REILLY, so as to endanger his life; a second count charged them with an assault so as to cause grievous bodily harm; a third count was an assault so as to cause actual bodily harm; and a fourth count with a common assault.
The prisoners pleaded not guilty, and were given in charge to a petty jury.Mr. Benjamin Armstrong, Sessional Crown Solicitor stated the facts of the case on behalf of the Crown.
The prisoners were defended by Mr. James Armstrong.
Peter REILLY, the prosecutor, was then called. His head was bandaged and he gave his evidence in a very inaudible tone of voice. His statement was to the effect that on the 30th of April he saw the prisoners drive two of their cows into his mother's pasture, and drive three of his mother's cows toward the public road; he asked them had they any demand against his mother's cows, and if so, not to beat or ill treat them; they told him that he or his mother had no claim upon the land; his father purchased the land about sixteen years ago; the prisoners' father had the land previously; there is a pass through the land, and he or his mother never prevented the prisoners from using it; the prisoners are his uncle's sons; they came across the mearing ditch, into his mother's land, and beat him with sticks and stones; they broke one of his teeth, and left him lying senseless on the ground; he was brought to the County Infirmary on the following day; he was very much injured, and has still "a kind of drunkenness in the head;" did nothing to provoke the prisoners except to protect his mother's cattle and land. (Examination and cross-examination)
The Jury, without leaving the box, found both prisoners guilty of a common assault, and his worship sentenced them to three months' imprisonment each.
John GAVIN was indicted for having, at Cavan on the 10th of April, 1862, assaulted John PLUNKETT, so as to do him grievous bodily harm. There were four counts in the indictment.
Mr. John Armstrong appeared for the prisoner, and applied to the Court to allow the case to be withdrawn. The prisoner was arrested on the night the assault was committed, and kept in prison until the following Monday, when he was sent for trial to the Quarter Sessions. Subsequently, his wife summoned PLUNKETT for an assault, which it was alleged he committed before GAVIN struck him, and PLUNKETT was also sent for trial.....The Chairman then inquired of the magistrates who tried the cases at petty sessions. They gave it as their opinion that the prosecution might be safely withdrawn, without any injury to the ends of justice or the peace of the town, and his worship accordingly allowed both cases to be withdrawn.
The Chairman then examined the driver of the carriage of the Dundalk and Enniskillen Railway Company, at which the stones had been thrown by the little boys who pleaded guilty; after which he called forward the little prisoners, and said that he regretted very much that it became his duty to send them to prison, but no other course was open to him. The public safety....demanded that an example should be made....He would take that and their tender years into account, but still he could not consistently with his duty to the public....that they should be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two calendar months.
Hugh WALLACE was indicted for having, at Lisnassaren, on the 21st of April, stolen a spade, the property of James BRADY, and with having had the spade in his possession, well knowing it to have been stolen, at Pottlerea on the 22nd of April. The prisoner, a wretched looking creature, was undefended, and pleaded Not Guilty.
James BRADY proved the loss of the spade, but could not say who took it. William DENNY deposed that the prisoner came to his house to ask for work; he had a spade upon his shoulder; witness refused to employ him, and went into his house; the prisoner left the spade in the garden, and went away; the spade was identified and claimed next day by BRADY, who came in search of it, in company with a policeman.
The Jury found him guilty without leaving the box.
It was also proved that, on the 28th of February, 1861, he had been found guilty at Monaghan, and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, for stealing a clock, a bible, two books, twelve ink powders, twelve dozen steel pens, and a lot of other articles.
Mr. George Robert GALOGLY, Governor of the Cavan Gaol, proved that the prisoner was a man of extremely bad character, and had been nine times in Gaol for robbery.
The Prisoner could not rightly recollect these circumstances--he only "thought" that he had been in gaol. The Chairman said it was evident the prisoner had a bad memory....The sentence of the court was, that he should be kept in penal servitude for five years.
James HEANY was indicted for having, at Swanlinbar, on the 31st of May, 1862, assaulted Henry HART, with the felonious intent of stealing his money. The Prisoner was undefended, and pleaded not guilty.
HART, and a friend of his named Thomas DOWD, were in the fair of Swanlinbar, when DOWD detected the prisoner in the act of putting his hand inside HART's waistcoat, where he had his purse, with some money in it. DOWD collared him, and gave him in charge to the police.
The Prisoner cross examined the witnesses with great cleverness and addressed the jury for the purpose of showing that he put his hand on HART's breast accidentally, when pushed by the crowd.
The Jury found him guilty at once.
Two former convictions for felony were proved against him by Mr. John M'CUTCHEON, Governor of Armagh Gaol, and Mr. GALOGLY, Governor of Cavan, deposed that he knew the prisoner to be a pickpocket.
The Chairman regretted that he could not pass sentence of five years penal servitude upon the prisoner, in consequence of the manner in which the indictment was framed, as it was evident that he was a man of notorious character. He should be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for eighteen months.
Michael MORAN was indicted for having, on the 9th of June, 1861, at Arvagh, stolen a purse, the property of Daniel DONOHOE. The Prisoner, an old man, pleaded not guilty. He was undefended.
DONOHOE deposed that he was standing in MACKIN's shop, in Arvagh, on the day named in the indictment; he had his purse, with money in it, in his trowsers' pocket; he felt his pocket get a great pluck, and turning round, found that the prisoner had stolen his purse; he took it from him, and afterwards gave him in charge to the police.
The Prisoner cross examined the witnesses in a most skillful manner, and also addressed the jury--alleging that he found the purse in the shop, and gave it to DONOHOE, who gave him in charge to the police when he was selling goods in the street an hour afterwards; that he had been a "dealing man" for thirty years, and was never inside a gaol or before a court previously, that he has six children, &c.
The Jury returned a verdict of guilty without a moment's deliberation....The sentence of the Court was that he should be imprisoned for eighteen months.
John CURTIS was indicted for having, at Cavan, on the 15th of April, 1861, stolen a watch, the property of Edward HAGARTY.
The prisoner was dressed in the uniform of the Cavan Militia. He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. M'GAURAN.
The evidence in this case was given in our Petty Sessions report in April last. HAGERATY's statement was that he was passing through the Main street of Cavan about half past ten o'clock on the night of the 15th of April, going towards his brother's lodging, when the prisoner, whom he did not know, spoke to and walked with him; after a short time the prisoner asked him to go to a public house for drink; he replied that he had no money; the prisoner said "Sure, you have a watch;" he replied that he had, upon which the prisoner snatched the watch out of his pocket, and ran away; HAGARTY at once gave information to the police, and the prisoner was arrested about an hour afterwards in Bridge street, by Constable MAGUIRE, to whom he gave a wrong name. It was alleged for the defence that HAGARTY was drunk, and had been speaking to some women of improper character, and did not know who stole his watch. HAGARTY denied that he had spoken to any of these women beyond bidding one of them the time of night when passing.
Constable MAGUIRE proved that he saw HAGARTY and the prisoner together in the street, and that a few minutes afterwards HAGARTY came to him, and charged the prisoner with robbery. HAGARTY was then sufficiently sober to give an accurate description of the prisoner and his dress, for he did not know his name. The watch was not found with prisoner, but it was produced at the Petty Sessions Court on the following Monday by an old woman, who alleged that she found it in a lane in Bridge street that morning. Strangely enough, however, there was not the slightest appearance of rust or damp on the watch, although the three previous days had been excessively wet! None of the evidence was now produced on the part of the Crown--no evidence, in fact, but that of MAGUIRE and HAGARTY--and there was no identification of the watch.
The Jury acquitted the prisoner, and his worship refused to make any order relative to the watch.
Eleanor CLARKE was indicted for having, on the 12th of May, 1862, stolen a coat, the property of Mr. Thos. KIERNAN, pawnbroker, Bridge street, Cavan. She pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to imprisoned for one week.
John M'DONNELL and _________ROONEY, charged with a felonious assault upon Alice POGUE, at Castlesaunderson, near Belturbet, were called, and ordered to enter into recognizances to appear and take their trial at the next Cavan Assizes, the Crown Solicitor considering that it was a case for that tribunal.
Robert QUIN was indicted for having, at Cappra, on the 20th of April, 1862, stolen a heifer, value £1, the property of Thomas HYLAND. The Prisoner pleaded not guilty. He was undefended.
The evidence against the prisoner was extremely clear. He killed the heifer after stealing it, and the carcass was found concealed in a ditch, near the house in which he lodged.
He was found guilty, and sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 12 months.
Mary BRADY was indicted for having, on the 16th of April, 1861, at Killeshandra, stolen a piece of tweed, the property of Mr. Henry BIGGER, draper, and also with having had it in her possession well knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr. BIGGER identified as his property the piece of tweed, which was found concealed on the prisoner when she was arrested.
The prisoner, a young and rather pleasing looking girl, asked several questions of the witnesses, but did not offer any satisfactory explanation of the manner in which she became possessed of the tweed. Although so young, a former conviction was proved against her. On the 26th of February, 1861, she was convicted of a felony, and sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. While undergoing her sentence in Cavan Gaol, she excited the sympathy of Mr. LENTAIGNE, the Inspector General of Prisoners, who gave her £7 for the purpose of emigrating, but on coming out of prison she returned to her evil courses.
The Chairman, after rebuking her for her persistence in crime, reserved his sentence until the following day, when he ordered her to be put forward and said that....they could not, consistently with their duty, impose upon her a lighter sentence than that she be kept in penal servitude for three years.
Prisoner--Well, thank your worship. Of course, it cannot be helped; and I am very much obliged to you.
Peter RORKE was indicted for having, on the 24th of March, 1862, at Bawnboy, stolen a rug, the property of John M'KIERNAN, of Ballinamore; and for having, on the 24th of April, 1862, had the said rug in his possession at Belturbet, well knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr. M'KIERNAN identified the rug. It was stolen from him at MAGUIRE's hotel in Bawnboy, on the 24th of March....It was presented for pawning at Mr. SMALL's in Belturbet on the 24th of April, by the prisoner, who was then arrested by Head Constable FLOYD, who had received information of the robbery....The jury found the prisoner guilty of having had the rug in his possession, knowing it to have been stolen. The Chairman sentenced him to three months' imprisonment from the date of his committal.
James MURRAY was indicted for the assault on Thomas BRADY, and also for a riot. The prisoner pleaded not guilty. The prosecutor did not appear, and the Crown withdrew the prosecution The prisoner was accordingly discharged.
The Petty Jury were then discharged, and the Court proceeded to dispose of the Insolvent Cases. These were few in number, and of an uninteresting nature.
After disposing of the Insolvent Cases, the Court adjourned until nine o'clock on Tuesday morning...The following were amongst the most interesting cases heard on Tuesday and Wednesday:--
The Earl Annesley v. James BRADY and others.
This was an ejectment process brought for recovery of portions of the lands of Clonervy, at present in the occupation of defendant. Plaintiff admitted that defendant held under a promise of a lease from the former owner of the lands, and was, in equity, entitled to a lease, and to all the rights specified in the rental under which Lord Annesley purchased in the Incumbered Estates Court; but it was alleged that defendant refused to accept such lease although it was repeatedly tendered to him; and that he endeavoured to "blow and cold," at one time claiming to hold under a lease, and at another time to be a tenant from year to year...The Court gave a decree to possession, the process to be "nilled" in case defendant signs a lease tendered by plaintiff within three months--the lease to be similar to that which defendant's brother, Peter BRADY, holds--the royalties and timber to be reserved to plaintiff, and the bog now held by defendant to be included in the lease.
Thomas REILLY and John BRADY, Executors of the Late Captain O'REILLY, of Annagh v. John M'GAHARAN
The process was brought for recovery of £8, amount of an I.O.U. passed by the defendant to the late Captain O'REILLY, on the 18th of May, 1859. Defendant admitted having received the money, but alleged that he paid it on the 4th of July, 1858. He had no evidence of the repayment, and the account book of Captain O'REILLY was produced, in which there was no entry of the repayment, although there was an entry of another payment by defendant on the 4th of July, 1859. His worship gave a decree for £8 and costs.
Joseph O'BRIEN v. John RAYBURN.
The process was brought for recovery of £3 5s, price of a double barrelled gun, straw, and a butcher's knife, given to defendant by plaintiff, for the purpose of being sold for his use, but which defendant had applied to his own use. Plaintiff's wife proved that here husband, who is now on the way to the Cape of Good Hope, gave defendant the articles to sell, and return the money got for them to him, and that defendant retained the articles and returned no money. The defence was that the articles were given in part payment of rent due by plaintiff to defendant's mother, and for which three promissory notes, to the about of £30 16s 9d, were passed by the plaintiff, two of which were overdue at the time. The case was dismissed.
Alexander OATES v. Patrick HEANY
The process was brought for recovery of £7 5s, loss and damage sustained by plaintiff, in consequence of defendant having, on the 5th of May last, sold him a cow warranted sound, which cow was unsound at time of sale. A notice was served upon defendant on the following day, to the effect that the cow would be sold in the town of Cootehill, if defendant did not return the purchase money. Defendant, in reply to this notice, promised to return the purchase money provided plaintiff did not sell the cow, and engaged to meet plaintiff at the fair of Stradone on the following day, but when he saw the cow in Stradone defendant refused to take it back. The cow was sold by auction in the fair of Stradone, to a man named DAWLEY, for £1 6s. The defence was that the cow was sound at the time of sale and that the sale to DAWLEY was a fraudulent one, the money paid by DAWLEY having been given to him by plaintiff through a friend, and DAWLEY being a relative of plaintiff's. DAWLEY denied the relationship, and asserted that he got the £1 6s from a man named BROWN on the day he purchased the cow; that he "did not rightly know" who BROWN was; that BROWN never asked for his money since, and that he never gave it to him; he admitted that he would not sell the cow for £6, but he was willing to take £7 5s for it. His worship said the sale to DAWLEY was clearly a fraudulent one, and dismissed the case.
CLINTON v. HARTLEY
This was an ejectment process, brought for recovery of possession of a house in the Main street of Cavan, occupied by defendant, in which he carries on business as a draper. The facts of the case were rather singular. Mr. Francis CLINTON, the father of Miss CLINTON, the plaintiff, was owner of the house--Lord Farnham being the ground landlord. In 1838 Mr. CLINTON accepted as co-tenants of the house, Mr. Thomas HARTLEY, of Countenan, and his son, Mr. James HARTLEY, the defendant, engaging by deed of agreement that they were not to be disturbed in the possession of the house so long as they paid the rent specified, and complied with the other agreements of the deed. Mr. Thomas HARTLEY was not an occupying (illegible), but was joined in the tenancy as security for his son, whom he was then (illegible). Mr. HARTLEY and his son paid the rent regularly and fulfilled the other conditions of the agreement, until the death of Mr. CLINTON, which occurred in the year 1857. The received their receipts for rent paid to Mr. CLINTON as joint tenants of the house. On the death of Mr. CLINTON, his daughter, the plaintiff, became owner of the house. Mr. James HARTLEY, some time after Mr. Clinton's death, wrote to Miss CLINTON, or her solicitor, Mr. M'FADIN, to know to whom he was to pay the rent, and some proceedings having been afterwards taken Mr. James HARTLEY paid, through his solicitor, Mr. Armstrong, the rent up to May, 1861, to Miss CLINTON, receiving a receipt in his own name....For the defence it was contended that the process was informal, and should have been brought against Thos. HARTLEY and James HARTLEY; that defendant could not, by any act of his destroy his father's rights.....The case having been heard at great length, his worship dismissed the process, without prejudice. Notice of appeal was served.
William TUITE and John Clifford TUITE v. Malcolm M'LEOD
This was an ejectment process postponed from last Quarter Sessions. The plaintiffs occupy the distillery in Belturbet, and trade under the title of John TUITE and Co. At last Quarter Sessions an application for postponement was made on the part of the defendant, and complied with, the grounds of application being briefly--That defendant occupied the house adjoining the distillery as a partner in the firm of Tuite and Co., that he was to receive a certain salary as manager, and nine twentieths of the profits of the firm as partner; that £300 of his money was invested as portion of the capital of the company; that the ejectment could not be sustained, as defendant never undertook to be tenant to the plaintiffs; and that a bill in Chancery was pending to prove defendant's right as partner in the firm, and to overrule the attempt made by plaintiffs to place him in the position of a servant of the company. At last Quarter Sessions one of the plaintiffs admitted that defendant invested £300 in the firm, and that he was to receive a share of the profits, but he denied that defendant was a partner in the firm. The case was then adjourned, and on the present occasion the Chairman refused to hear the case until the question of partnership was decided in the Court of Chancery, as a decision on his part would tend to prejudice and damage the alleged right of the defendant as a partner in the firm of Tuite and Co.
William TUITE and John Clifford TUITE v. James BERRY
The plaintiffs were the same as in the last case, and the process was brought to recover £4 4s, price of coals sold by plaintiffs to defendant. Mr. BERRY, the defendant, is one of the coroners for the county, and he was willing to pay the amount claimed, but he had been served with a printed notice by Mr. M'LEOD, cautioning him not to pay any money to the Messrs. TUITE until the right of his title to a partnership in the firm of Tuite and Co. had been decided.
Mr. John Armstrong said he appeared on behalf of Mr. BERRY, and applied for a postponement of the case, as Mr. BERRY did not at present know to whom he was to pay the money. The case could not be heard until the bill which Mr. M'LEOD, one of the partners in the firm of Tuite and Co., and filed in Chancery, had been decided.....After some further arguments, the case was dismissed without prejudice and without costs.
Mr. Knipe then informed Mr. BERRY that he would serve him with a summons and plaint. We understand that Mr. BERRY lodged the amount claimed in Court.
LEATHAM v. REILLY
The process was brought by the plaintiff, a young lady named LEATHAM, against the defendant, Mrs. Jannetta Martha O'REILLY, relict of the ate Captain O'REILLY, of Annagh, near Belturbet, for recovery of £14 7s 8d, wages engaged to be paid by defendant for plaintiff's services as governess to her daughter. Plaintiff's allegation was that defendant engaged to pay her £16 per annum, and she remained six weeks in her employment, when, in consequence of some misconduct or impropriety in which she detected Miss O'REILLY, she was obliged to leave defendant's service, after demanding and being refused a settlement. She then went to her parish priest, and acquainted him with the facts of the case. By his directions she wrote to defendant acquainting her of the impropriety of which her daughter had been guilty, but defendant refused to reply to her letter, or come to any settlement....The defence was a total denial of the engagement, and an allegation that plaintiff left defendant's service of her own accord--having been employed, without a specification for wages, as part menial part nursery governess. Miss O'REILLY was produced to prove that plaintiff had never complained of anything in her conduct, and that she left because the servants were opposed to her. Some innuendoes relative to plaintiff were made by defendant, but testimonials, giving plaintiff an extremely high character, were read from the Right Rev. Dr. BROWN, and Edward M'CREANER, Esq., District Inspector of National Schools--plaintiff having been upwards of five years mistress of a National School. A great deal of extraneous matter was introduced into the case. His Worship left the case to a jury, who returned a verdict of £3 for plaintiff, with confirmation of her allegations.
The Court sat until about six o'clock on Wednesday evening, and his Worship opened the Quarter Sessions at Bailieborough on Thursday. The business of the Sessions comprised 330 Civil Bills, 14 Ejectment Processes, 26 Crown cases--the latter number being considerably below the average.
BELTURBET PETTY SESSIONS
At this Court on Saturday the magistrates present were:--Captain Nesbitt, John Rogers, Esq., and Thomas Frederick Knipe, Esq. The cases for hearing were few in number and unimportant.
CAVAN PETTY SESSIONS--MONDAY
In consequence of the magistrates having to assist the Chairman of the county at the Quarter Sessions, this Court did not sit on Monday last, and was adjourned until Monday next.
COURT OF COMMON PLEASE--JUNE 23
SITTINGS AT NISI PRIUS AFTER TERM
(Before Chief Justice MONAHAN and Special City Juries)ALLEGED LIBEL, &C.
TAYLOR v. CLARKE
The plaintiff in this case, Mr. James TAYLOR, is a surgeon, practising in the town of Bailieborough, County Cavan, and the medical officer of the district poorhouse; and the action was brought by him against the defendant, Mr. Joseph CLARKE, who is also a medical practitioner, and a resident in the same locality, to recover damages for the publication of certain alleged libels, stated to be contained in anonymous letters, addressed to the Poor Law Commissioner, in the months of July and August last. There were also counts in slander. The damages were laid at £500, and the defendant denied that he either wrote or spoke defamatory words of the plaintiff.
Messrs. CLARKE, Q.C., and HAMILL were of counsel for the plaintiff; and Messrs. BALL, Q.C., and DEVITT, for the defendant.
The alleged libels, which were respectively dated the 16th July and 8th of August, 1861, stated that great cruelty and want of judgment had been shown by the plaintiff in his treatment of one of the inmates of the poorhouse named M'CAFFREY, and the plaintiff now alleged that those letters were written by the defendant, and addressed to the commissioner, in order to have him removed from his situation of medical officer, for the purpose of procuring his (the defendant's) own appointment. The alleged slanders were statements stated to have been made by Doctor CLARKE to his patients, &c, to the same effect as the letters. The defences relied on were--a total denial of the authorship of the anonymous letters, or of speaking to a like purport....The case occupied the entire day on Monday and was resumed today, when the Jury found for the plaintiff, £100 and costs.
CONSOLIDATED CHAMBER--JUNE 25
Baron FITZGERALD sat after the termination of his nisi prius sitting, to hear motions for the three law courts.
CLARKE v. TAYLOR
Mr. DOWSE, on behalf of the defendant, applied to change the venue from the County Wicklow to the County Cavan, on the ground that all the witnesses in the case resided in Bailieborough. The actions was brought to recover £24 16s 8d for services alleged by the plaintiff to have been performed by him, as deputy for the defendant in the Bailieborough Workhouse, both being medical men. The defendant pleaded that the services were intended to be gratuitous, and also a set-off for alleged attendance upon the plaintiff's wife.
Mr. DEVITT opposed the motion, on the grounds that there were no considerations of convenience to support it, and that another action between the parties had been the subject of much controversy in Bailieborough.
His Lordship refused the motion; costs to be cast in the cause.
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.