Newspaper Abstracts

Death of the Countess Dowager of Shannon

We regret to state the death of this venerable Lady, which took place at Castlemartyr, on the 30th ult. She was one of the most humane and charitable characters that ever adorned her station in life, and the regret that is felt in the whole of the district which was the scene of her benevolence, attests the esteem and generation with which she was regarded. The Countess was eldest daughter of the Right Hon. J. Ponsonby, Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, and sister of the Earl of Besborough.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH-SATURDAY.

     An application was made by Mr. O'Connell, on the part of the Rev. Mr. O'Keefe, against Messrs. Glynn and Sheehan, Proprietors of the Evening Mail, on an information for a libel. The libel was generally against the Roman Catholic Priests of Cork, of which this gentleman is one, and therefore considered himself libelled.
     Conditional and granted.
The King, at the prosecution of Daniel O'Connell, against R. Sheehan, Gent.
     Mr. FULLAM, Attorney for the prosecution, has, by order of the Court, received notice, that this trial is fixed for Thursday, the 15th instant.

Westmeath v. Westmeath.- Monday the Arches' Court promounced Lady Westmeath entitled to separation from bed and board. His Lordship intends to appeal to the Court of Delegates.

The Orange paper contradicts a statement put forth in one of the biblical placards, namely that a bounty of five pounds and a blanket will be given to each of those who will enlist under the banners of the new "reformation".

(Extract of a Letter from Cavan)

"The Rev. Thomas Maguire, the P.P. of Ennismagrath, in a powerful appeal from the altar in Cavan Chapel on last Sunday, took a sarcastic fling at one of those who would feign to appear a reformer of others. "reform" said he 'like charity, should begin at home,' the man who would recommend it to others, should practice it himself. Some of those preachers could lecture on handy capping, or gambling, with more dexterity than on a text of the Sacred Volume, and before they would recommend pure morality to others, they ought to compensate those females whom they ____ and support. Delicacy forbids the detail of the particulars, but every one knew whose quarters he beat about."

DIED- On Sunday night, at his house, Bellevan, near this city, Joseph Flinn, Esq. His death was occasioned by a severe fracture of the skull, which he received the night previous, in consequence of a fall from his horse. He has left a widow, and four infant children, to deplore the loss of a kind husband and most affectionate father.

On Thursday night, a little after ten o'clock, a man belonging to the Nora Creina steam vessel named Alexander Alexander, fell into the river, opposite Quay-lane, and was unfortunately drowned. The watchmen, on hearing of the accident, made diligent search for him with their hooks, &c. but did not succeed in picking him up. The body was yesterday, at low water, found lying on the mud. Mr. Laurence Reynolds, Apothecary, in his anxious efforts to save the poor fellow, also fell into the river, but, being a good swimmer, soon extricated himself. No less than four other persons fell in the same night, all of whom were fortunately saved.--Waterford Chronicle.

ROBBERY & REWARD

Whereas, between the House of One and Two o'Clock, on Morning of Wednesday, the 7th of February instant, the Stores and Offices of JOHN HANDY, Esq. situated in Green-street, in this City, were broken into, by several armed Persons at present unknown, who having severely cut, and wounded Mr. ROBERT M'CONNELL, residing on the Premises, succeeded in robbing the said Office of upwards of £650- about £450 thereof being the Property of the said ROBERT M'CONNELL, and the remaining part thereof, the Property of the said JOHN HANDY. Now, We whose Names are hereunto subscribed, being desirous to bring the Persons concerned in such daring Outrage and Robbery to punishment, do hereby offer to pay the Sums attached to our respective Names, to such Person or Persons as shall, within Twelve Calendar Months from the Date hereof, give such Information as may lead to the Apprehension and Conviction of any one or more of the Persons concerned in said Outrage and Robbery- or the Sum of

FIFTY POUNDS

to any Person or Persons who will give such private Information as may lead to their discovery.
Kilkenny, February 9, 1827.

The List lies at our Office for further Subscriptons.

John Handy £30 0 0
Thomas Cronyn 2 0 0
Robert M'Connell 20 0 0
Rich. O'Donnell 2 0 0
Lord Bishop of Ossory 10 0 0
Matt. Archdekin 1 0 0
Harvey Devereux 3 0 0
Dean of Ossory 10 0 0
J. Gresham 2 0 0
K. Marum R.C. Bishop 3 0 0
John Watters 2 0 0
Wm J. Douglas 2 0 0
J. Bradish, Mayor 10 0 0
Abraham Denroche 3 0 0
William Kingsmill 5 0 0
John Bracken 5 0 0
W.H. Bracken, D. Recorder 5 0 0
Basil Gray 2 0 0
John M'Craith 2 0 0
H. Anderson & Lewis Anderson, F Sherida 5 0 0
T. Waring, Troyswood 5 0 0
Redmond Reade 2 0 0
John Barwis 2 0 0
John Tresham 1 0 0
John Waring, Co. Treasurer 5 0 0
John Lawson 3 0 0
Thomas Prim 3 0 0
Charles Madden 3 0 0
Langrishe Prim 5 0 0
Sam Madden 3 0 0
Patrick Scott 1 0 0
Paris Anderson 2 0 0
James M'Creary 2 0 0
T. Hartford, jun. 5 0 0
Andrew Henderson 5 0 0
B. Hartford, jun 5 0 0

BIRTHS

On Sunday, at Fort Arthur, the lady of Captain Galway, of a daughter.
On Saturday, in Waterford, the lady of Thomas Meagher, jun. Esq. of twin daughters.

MARRIED

     On the 2d instant, Peter Henrien, Esq. Middle Gardiner-street, Dublin, to Sarah Caroline, Eldest daughter of James Barron of Sarah Ville, Co. Waterford, Esq.
     Thomas Hearn, of Callan, Esq. to Eliza, only daughter of the late Richard Burke, of Summerhill, near Borris Oleigh, County Tipperary, Esq.
     On the 28th instant, by the Rev. Thomas Barry, John E. O'Connor, Esq. of Bantry, to Bridget Mary, only daughter of the late Samuel Piddell, Esq.
     In Dublin, Alexander Wm. Hill of Gloucester-street, Esq. to Jane Emelie, only daughter of the late Major J. Mellish Harrison, 34th Regt.

DIED

     February 1, at Hastings, Mrs. Jones, relict of the late Right Hon. Theophilus Jones, and sister to the late Countess of Clermont and Dowager Lady Rossmore.
     At Youghal, on Saturday last, the 3d inst. at an advanced age, Mrs. Frances Cartwright, relict of the late Joseph Cartwright, formerly of the city of Kilkenny, Esq.
     On Monday 5th inst. in Cork, Samuel Merrick, Esq.
     In Marlborough-street, Cork, on Monday morning in his 67th year, Arthur Hurley, Esq.
     In Tipperary, Mr. Edmund Scully, Weigh-master.

RECORDER'S COURT, Friday

     The Recorder, accompanied by Sir Robert Shaw and Alderman Abbott, took his seat on the Bench precisely at 11 o'clock. Mr. Sheehan appeared at the same time at the traverser's bar.
     The Recorder, in pronouncing sentence, addressed the traverser in the following words:-
     Remmy Sheehan, you have pleaded guilty to an assault on the person of Daniel O'Connell, Esq. and to the particulars of that assault I hall have occasion hereafter more particularly to advert. You have made an affidavit in mitigation of punishment, and in that affidavit you have alleged the fact, upon your information and belief, and from a report in Saunder's News Letter , that on the Saturday previous to the assault on Mr. O'Connell, he did, in the Catholic Association, addressing himself to the subject of the Evening Mail, and in illusion to some pecuniary transactions that are not detailed, make use of the following epithets as applied to you and your brother; namely, that you were Renegades and Miscreants." Your affidavit proceeds to state, that under the influence of strong excited feelings you gave a blow to Mr. O'Connell with your umbrella, which you happened to have in your hand, and you further state that Mr. O'Connell was in the habit of using most insulting and abusive language towards you and your brother. you state, upon your information and belief, that Mr. O'Connell was in the habit of applying to the Reporters of certain Newspapers, whenever he used strong, and, as you say, very abusive language; that the was in the habit of applying to the Proprietors and Editors, of such Newspapers not to insert the abusive language which you allege he indulges in against you and your brother. You state that you have no connection with the Evening Mail as Editor or Proprietor of that paper. That is the substance of your affidavit. It has been answered by one from Mr. O'Connell; and in the course of his affidavit, he most certainly does not deny having made use of the epithets to him respecting you and your brother. In reference to this particular subject, I have no hesitation in saying, that the language attributed to Mr. O'Connell, if made use of by Mr. O'Connell, and it has not been denied by him, is in its nature highly reprehensible and insulting, and that, from the frailty and fallibility of our common nature, it was, no doubt, calculated strongly to excite the feelings of any gentleman. We feel it necessary to say that, in our judgment, this attack upon you and your character, as well as upon that of your brother, (but we shall confine the case on this occasion to yourself,) was of such a nature, and amounted to such a provocation, that it was natural to expect that its use would lead to, though it could by no means justify, the outrage which you have avowedly committed. It undoubtedly ought, and it has had, considerable influence on the Court in admeasuring the amount of punishment, which they have judged it proper to announce. To call a man a Renegade and a Miscreant is certainly making use of language which we are bound to say, nothing has offered in the course of this discussion to explain or justify. The strongest mode to put it is distinctly this- what would the prosecutor himself think, if in a public meeting he were called a Renegade and a Miscreant when he was not present, and had no opportunity to confront the accusation, and if he found that this attack upon his character was published in a newspaper of great circulation, and would he perhaps read throughout the united kingdom. Mr. O'Connell, in his affidavit, states a number of circumstances- that for a considerable time, he had been unremittingly assailed with personal attacks and abuse in The Evening Mail ; he asserts that he believes you were the Editor of that publication, and he has also in another part of the affidavit proceeded to state, that several articles were published immediately after this transaction in the Evening Mail , which articles the Court had read, and having considered the affidavit, in that respect, I am called upon to say that it does not occur to me that we can legitimately take for granted that you were the author of these articles. Mr .O'Connell states that you were; and he further states that he had witnesses in Court, who, if the trial had gone on, would be competent to shew a continued Editorship on your part. These persons were in Court, and no affidavits from them were produced. If they had proved the fact of your being Editor and author of these highly reprehensible articles, the Court would act accordingly. But no such testimony was given. Mr. O'Connell states that he had no control over these witnesses; that they were in a situation in which he could not coerce them to make an affidavit. If it did appear that any such application was made, nor is it stated by Mr. O'Connell that he heard any of them whom he supposed competent to prove the fact, make a declaration to that effect. I am, therefore, clearly of opinion, that we should not act upon the belief of Mr. O'Connell in the manner in which he supposes that we ought, by introducing these topics.
     Mr. Glascock here said that he offered two of the witnesses to Mr. Bennett.
     Mr. Fullam denied the fact.
     The Recorder- I have every respect for the character of Mr. Glascock, but I will not permit any interuption [sic] from any side. We have given to this case our most anxious deliberations, and in the judgment which I am about to pronounce. We are decidedly unanimous, "The Court after a just and impartial discussion, is going to pronounce what I may say is a comparatively reduced and mitigated punishment. Mr. O'Connell in his affidavit, has stated the particulars of this outrage, and he had added that this attack was made upon him without any previous communication directly or indirectly in reference to the publication. Mr. O'Connell further mentions, that if such application had been made to him, he would have been most solicitous and prompt to give immediate and the most satisfactory explanation and satisfaction in his power, and that if, on recollection or inquiry, he had reason to suppose that he had uttered any thing not founded, he would immediately retract and apologize. These are the circumstances which the Court kept in recollection,

and they are not denied in your own affidavit. Here I may be permitted to observe, that we by no means consider this an ordinary or every day occurrence. The act on your part appears to have been premeditated and deliberate. It appears, not only from the affidavit of Mr. O'Connell, but abundantly from the circumstances of the case as stated by yourself, that in one of the most exposed and public streets in Dublin, you purposely and intentionally assailed Mr. O'Connell and gave him one of the greatest insults one man can receive from another; a blow with an umbrella. The present and almost inevitable tendency of such violations of the public peace at the moment, and on the spot. But your there disappeared, and so far as it regards this transaction, there it terminated. With every disposition to make allowance for the feelings, frailties, and fallibility incident to our common nature, which render it very often extremely difficult to restrain ourselves, it is impossible for the Court not to perceive and to act upon the motives which decidedly influenced you in violating the public peace. Mr. O'Connell states, that you never manifested any symptom of any thing like contrition for what had happened. It appears that you boasted of it, and made it a matter of triumph in one of the Public Police Offices in this city. Your object certainly was, an in your address to the Court you unquestionably acknowledged it to be your clear and undoubted object, that in giving this blow you intended to provoke Mr. O'Connell to send you a hostile message. This is a feature in the case to which it is impossible not to look; that in giving the blow you did all in your power to induce Mr. O'Connell to commit one of the greatest misdemeanours known to the Criminal Law. You, Sir, addressed the Court, and you appealed to what you called the laws of honour. It is a barbarous code written in blood, and not known to the administration of justice in this Country. It is only to be mentioned in order to be reprobated. Mr. O'Connell in this instance has acted with good feeling and I will add with true courage. He has sworn on his oath that if he had given offence, and was convinced of his error, he would make an apology. He received instead of that a blow, evidently with a design of provoking him to fight a duel. Mr. O'Connell has had the good feeling and good sense instead of appealing to what you call the laws of honour, to look to the laws of his Country for protection and redress. The crime of duelling should not be known, or if known, it should not be forgotten, what is the opinion respecting it, given to us by one of the greatest Judges that has ever graced the law Bench- I mean Judge Foster- "If a duel (he says) death does ensue, in the eyes of the law it is murder founded upon the deepest revenge. If a person driven to a duel is activated not by revengeful motives, but by a punetilio of sudden honour, he is not to be excused. he who deliberately seeks to deprive another of life, sets in defiance of all laws, human and divine, let his motives be what they may." Again says the same enlightened Judge- "All cases of deliberate homicide, founded upon a principle of revenge, are murders." No man is allowed by the law to redress his own wrongs. The laws of society afford him the means of redress, and to them he should resort. If his wrongs be of such a nature that the laws cannot afford him redress, let him bear his lot in patience and remember that 'vengeance belongeth only to the Most High.' Your object, Sir, cannot be mistaken; for in your address to this Court, you frequently avowed it. It does not remain consequently a matter of doubt. We have it upon your own candid avowal. To make use of words tending to induce a man to send a hostile message, is an indictable misdeameanour and renders the offender punishable at law. Men are indicted for the use of mere words- how much more should they be punished for giving a blow? You may say that you had no other means of redress, and that you were driven by necessity to the course which you adopted. You, Sir, appear to have taken no time to deliberate, or to consult persons competent to inform you whether you could obtain redress at law or not. If Mr. O'Connell or any other gentleman, no matter how exalted his situation or character might be, made use of abusive language, an action for libel would be against the individual. If words were used tending to provoke you to fight a duel- in that supposition and event you are not without your remedy at law, which would shield and protect you. But at all events, if you were in such an unfortunate predicament, that though deeply and personally injured, you could not obtain redress at law, you should commit an act that might lead to blood and murder, you should leave your injuries to be redressed by the great Author of Creation, remembering that vengeance belongs only to the Most High. I have stated what has occurred to me and the entire Court with regard to this case. Mr .O'Connell has thrown himself upon the law of his country for protection, and in my opinion we would be very unworthy of distributing that justice which we are bound by oath to administer, if we would allow a gentleman who, avoiding mortal combat, looked for protection to the laws of his country, to have it to say that he applied in vain. I have said already that the Court have given you all the benefit of the circumstances in your affidavit. With respect to the publication, its tendency to provoke is manifest, and the language has not been denied by Mr. O'Connell. This, therefore, formed a palliation of the punishment which the Court would otherwise inflict for such an outrage. Under all the circumstances of the case, the unanimous judgment of the Court is, that you Remmy Sheehan, be imprisoned for the space of three months in his Majesty's gaol of Newgate-that you, be fined ten marks, and that you be further imprisoned till such fine be paid.
Mr. Sheehan was then conducted to Newgate.

MEMORIAL FROM MR. O'CONNELL

We are authorised to state, that Mr. O'Connell, on his return from Court, transmitted a memorial to the Lord Lieutenant praying for a remission of Mr. Sheehan's sentence.--Morning Register.

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.