Cavan Observer
Published in Cavan, county Cavan

May 5, 1860


Magistrates present:--Theophilus Thompson, Chairman; Nathaniel Montgomery, and Andrew Carden, Esqrs.

John LYNCH was sworn in as a volunteer to the Cavan Militia.

There were three or four cases of drunkenness, none of them possessing any peculiarity except that of Maria REILLY (one of the "unfortunates") who was charged with having been drunk in the streets of this town on the morning of the 22nd April.....The Chairman said they would only give her 48 hours' imprisonment for the present, but if she is again convicted of the same offence, she will be sent to gaol for a week, and her hair cut.

Some parties were fined for allowing their cattle to wander on the public road.

John M'CLELLAND, steward to Captain Carden, J.P., summoned Alexander PATTERSON for having allowed three head of cattle to trespass upon Capt. Carden's plantation at Drumulla. The case occupied a considerable time, there being a difference of opinion relative to the division and keeping in repair of the mearing ditch between Patterson's holding and the plantation. Finally Captain Carden consented to have the summons nilled until he makes inquiry as to Patterson's arrangement concerning the mearing with former holders of the plantation.

John MAGENNIS obtained a decree for possession of a portion of a house in the Main-street, held by Alexander REILLY, as tenant, at 4s. per week.

Mary BAKER v. Joseph LEE

This was a civil bill process for £1 14s., wages earned from the 28th of August, 1858, to the 19th of April, 1860. Plaintiff is a little girl, at present an inmate of the workhouse. She was admitted on last Board day, after being in defendant's service during the period specified in the process; and on hearing her statement on that day, the Guardians directed that LEE should be sued for the amount of her wages. The Porter of the Workhouse produced the agreement entered into between defendant and the Master of the Workhouse....Defendant said he "paid her in clothes," and exhibited some articles of clothing purchased by him for the girl.

Porter--You didn't buy her 5s. worth of clothes. She had a very good suit when you took her out of the house....

The Chairman informed him that he was bound to fulfill his agreement with the girl. If she did not suit him, he should have brought her back to the workhouse at the termination of his agreement.

Defendant said he "didn't know the law."

A decree was then give for £1, and the clothes (a gown and chemise) were given to the Porter for the girl.

LEE said the decision was "too hard entirely," and that it would make him "turn agin doin' anything for the like of her," &c.

Thomas SMITH summoned Patrick REILLY and Terence REILLY for the trespass of thirteen head of cattle on his meadow.....The defence was that complainant's mearing was in bad order, but it appearing in evidence that this was partly caused by defendants, the Court imposed a fine of 6d. per head, and ordered SMITH and the REILLYs to make up their mearings.

The Court rose early.

We deeply regret to record the death of Lieutenant-General Edward FLEMING, C.B., Colonel of the 27th Regiment. This gallant officer, having entered the army in 1803, served the 31st regiment in Sicily and Calabria, under Sir John STUART, in 1806, and in the following year was at the taking of Alexandria and the storming of Rosetta. In the Peninsula, he served the campaigns of 1806-9-10 and 11, including the battles of Talavera, Bussaco, Albuera (where he was severely wounded), and several minor actions. Since then, he saw hard service all over the world, in the East and West Indies and Canada. Lieutenant-General FLEMING acted for thirteen years as Inspecting Field Officer of Glasgow District, and was presented by Glasgow with the freedom of the city. He commanded for many years the Limerick District where he was popular with all parties. He was owner of the Belleville estate in Cavan, his native county.

DEATH OF SURGEON CARSON--It is with sincere regret we announce the death of Surgeon John CARSON, which took place, after a short but painful illness, on yesterday. Mr. CARSON was about thirty-six years of age and but recently married. He bore the reputation of being a very skilful practitioner, and was highly respected by all who had the pleasure of his acquaintance. To the poor of this town and the adjoining districts his death is a heavy calamity, for to them his professional services were always given without the expectation of other reward than that which we trust he is now enjoying.



Mr. D. SEYMOUR appeared for the petitioner.

This was a petition for the dissolution of marriage, brought by Mrs. Mary Ann D'ARCY against Henry Thomas D'ARCY, on the ground of his bigamy and adultery. The parties were married on the 1st of June, 1836, and they lived together in the county of Meath and in other places in Ireland, and subsequently in England and the Channel Islands, until a few years ago. On the 12th of February 1859, Mr. D'ARCY married a lady named Tempest at Marylehone Church, and they afterwards lived together at Union-street, Oxford-street, as man and wife.

The Court thought the wife was entitled to a decree, with costs.

MAY 12, 1860


Before William Babington, Esq., J.P., Chairman; Captain Michael Phillips, J.P.; David Fielding Jones, Esq., J.P.; Andrew Carden, Esq., J.P.; John Garnett Tatlow, Esq., J.P.; and William Murray Hickson, Esq., R.M.

Margaret M'MAHON appeared to swear informations against Mary Anne LEDDY under the following circumstances:--LEDDY is a woman of bad character, and rather troublesome to the constabulary of Butlersbridge, is the neighbourhood of which she generally lurks; some time last year she stole a shawl from Mrs. M'MAHON, who resides in Butlersbridge; she was prosecuted and imprisoned for the theft; when released from prison she returned to Butlersbridge, vowing vengeance against Mrs. M'MAHON; she repeatedly threatened to take her life; and at last took to throwing stones and breaking the windows.....Mrs. M'MAHON, Constable NEADOM, and a woman named Margaret BEATY having given evidence as to the threats, &c., LEDDY, during the examination of the witnesses, protested that they wanted to "swear her life away."......The Court informed Miss LEDDY that as it was evident she is a dangerous character, she should give bail to keep the peace for six months--herself in £10, and two sureties in £10 each, and be allowed a week to find the bail.

Anne LENNON and Bridget M'CABE were each sentenced to 48 hours' imprisonment for having been drunk in the streets of this town on Saturday night.

The Chairman read a letter from a Mr. KING stating that on the 4th inst., while driving in the neighbourhood of Cavan, he was obstructed for some time by two carts belonging to Mr. MARSDEN, which were on the public road, and no person in charge of them.

Two of Mr. MARSDEN's employes were in attendance, and stated that the driver of the carts had only left them for about five minutes, in order to get the key of the store, and during that time Mr. KING drove up. The Chairman said that as Mr. KING did not come forward to sustain his charge, the Court had nothing to do with it.

Constable M'ANEA had a summons against Mr. MARSDEN for not having his name painted or branded on the carts. The men stated that it was not Mr. MARSDEN's fault that his name was not upon the cars; they had been freshly painted, and the painter delayed lettering them.

The Chairman said that the owners of carts, cars, waggons, &c., were bound to have their names legibly painted upon them....The penalty for neglecting to do so was 10s; but as the present was the first case of the kind which had come before the Court, they would only impose a fine of 6d. and costs.

John FINNON, a private in the Cavan Militia, was brought up in custody, charged with having absented himself from the last training of that regiment.

Sergeant EDWARDS deposed that the usual notice had been sent to the prisoner to attend the training. He came in to the present training, and was arrested at the barrack. A discharge from the 67th regiment was found on his person. He had given a false name to the 67th when enlisting.

The prisoner stated that he enlisted in the 67th Regiment a short time before the last training. He was ignorant that he was acting illegally in enlisting in the 67th...Sergeant M'KEAGUE said that those enrolled in the Militia must make application to the Adjutant if they wish to enter the line....Sergeant Edwards said the prisoner bore a very good character during the time he was in the Cavan Militia.

The case having closed, the Chairman informed the prisoner that he had made a very narrow escape; for if the Court considered he had enlisted in the 67th with a fraudulent intention, they would send him to gaol for six months. They considered, however, that he had done so through ignorance; and taking into account the good character, which he had received, would order him to be discharged.

James REILLY was charged with a similar offence....Captain Phillips said he could give REILLY an excellent character. The sergeants also said Reilly was a most well conducted young man. Sergeant ROURKE said the men were obliged to give notice when changing their residence. The Adjutant gave a verbal order to that effect at last training, but it was not inserted in the order book.

The Court having consulted, the Chairman said they would give the prisoner the benefit of his good character, but they could not reduce the penalty lower than a fine of 40s., or two months' imprisonment. However, if he got a memorial to the Lord Lieutenant drawn up, the magistrates would sign it.

REILLY said he had no money, except what bounty is coming to him [which is nil, as he has forfeited all by his absence from the training.] Mr. Jones said he would be happy to lend him the money, which he could return if his memorial succeeded. Reilly, after thanking Mr. Jones for his kindness, was discharged.

Alexander HEWIT was sentenced to two months' imprisonment for a similar offence; and their Worships promised, as he bore a good character, and pleaded that he did not hear of training in time, to sign a memorial for remission of punishment, if he got one drawn up.

The Court then rose.


On the 1st instant, in the second Presbyterian Church, Drum, by the Rev. John WHITSETT, Joseph GORDON, Esq., Bloomfield, California, to Olivia Mary, second daughter of the Rev. James BONES, Cootehill


Her Majesty's Letters Patent have been passed under the Great Seal of Ireland, appointing the Rev. Thomas CARSON, L.L.D., to be Dean of Kilmore.

APPOINTMENTS--Diocese of Armagh--Rev. Samuel SIMPSON, to the rectory of Derrynoose; patron, the Primate. Rev. Richard OULTON, to the rectory and vicarage of Keady; patron the Primate.

Diocese of Clonfert and Kilmacduagh--Rev. Francis CARR, to Creagh Union, Ballinasloe; patron the Rector.

Diocese of Down and Connor--Rev. James WHITESIDE, A.B., to the perpetual curacy of Mackamorea, patron, the Trustees. Rev. Thomas COOPER, A.B., to the Grange of Ballyscullin; patron the Bishop. Rev. G. CRAIG, to the curacy of Christ Church, Belfast, patron, the Trustees.

Diocese of Dublin--Rev. John LYNCH, to the district Church of Monkstown; patrons the Trustees.

Diocese of Kilmore, Elphin and Ardagh--The Lord Bishop has been pleased to promote the Rev. Andrew HOGG, L.L.D., to the valuable living of Castleraghan, vacant by the death of the Very Rev. Lord FITZGERALD and VESEY. The Rev. Hugh MURRAY, St. Peter's, Athlone, is to succeed the Rev. Dr. HOGG as Rector of Cavan.

Diocese of Ossory--Rev. Charles C. PEPPER, to the prebend of Killamery; patron the Bishop.

Diocese of Raphoe--Rev. Samuel MARTIN, A.B., to the perpetual curacy of Conway; patron the Rector. Rev. Alexandre DELAP, to the perpetual curacy at Milford; patron the Rector.

RESIGNATIONS--Diocese of Armagh--Rev. Richard OULTON, the perpetual curacy of Altadezart; patron, the Rector of Pomeroy.

Diocese of Down and Connor--Rev. James WHITEHEAD, the stipendary curacy of Glenavcy; patron, the Vicar.

Diocese of Raphoe--Rev. Samuel MARTIN, the perpetual curacy of Milford; patrons, the Incumbents of Kilmacrhan and Tullyaughnish. Rev. Alexander DELAP, the perpetual curacy of Mount(?), patron, the Bishop.

Diocese of Tuam--Rev. John LYNCH, the rectory of Ballinakill; patron, the Bishop.

May 19, 1860


Before Wm. Babington, J.P., Chairman; Nathaniel Montgomery, J.P., and R. Erskine , J.P., Esqrs.

A dispute of some kind relative to land between a man named M'DONNELL and another named FLOOD, was left to the arbitration of Mr. Thomas REILLY, the landlord; if not settled before next Monday the case will be tried by the court.

Mr. TULLY appeared for FLOOD, and Mr. John Armstrong for M'DONNELL.


This was a dispute relative to a pass which had been in the possession of complainant's family since "the days of Oliver Cromwell." Defendant "laboured" the pass some months ago, for which he was summoned by complainant, and it appeared at that time, that the pass runs straight through a field belonging to defendant, who offered to give complainant a pass in every respect as good......The Court ordered that as defendant did not prepare the new pass, though allowed a month to do so, he should yield up the old pass to complainant.

Mr. S. Knipe appeared for complainant.

Mr. Edward FEGAN obtained a decree for possession of a house held by a man named David PALMER, at 2s. 6d. per week, defendant being allowed a week to procure another house.

Mr. William HAGUE obtained a decree for possession of a house held by a man named Patrick LYNCH, at 1s. 6d. per week. Defendant allowed seven days to procure a house.


This was a summons for having detained two pieces of muslin given for the purpose of embroidering.

Mr. Burke, agent to Messrs. Stewart, deposed that the first piece was taken by defendant on the 26th of April 1858.

On reference to the Act of Parliament, which provides that such summonses shall be brought within four months from the date on which the work is taken out, the Court ruled that they had no jurisdiction as regards the first piece, as the complaint was not brought in time.

Mr. Burke deposed that the second piece was taken out on the 19th day of January 1860; the value of the muslin and thread was about 4s.; understands the woman is going to America; her husband, on Friday last, said the work had been mislaid and promised to pay for it. The service of the summons having been proved, the Court imposed a penalty of 5s. fine and 5s. cost; or in default of payment a fortnight's imprisonment, and recommended Mr. Burke to wait for a few days before taking out the warrant, as defendant's husband might pay the amount. Defendant did not appear.

Patrick DUNNE v. Michael BRADY

This was a summons for trespass of eighteen head of cattle. The Court fined defendant 9s. and costs.

Robert CHRISTY v. James M'KERNAN

This was a summons for having dug up a portion of the side of a public road, of which complainant is subcontractor. The summons was brought by direction of the County Surveyor, and not withstanding some very uncomplimentary remarks and insinuations made by defendant, complainant said he did not wish to press the case. The Court fine defendant 2s. 6d. and costs.

A farmer-looking man applied to the Court to know what course he should take under the following circumstances:--He had purchased a pig in the fair, and given 2s. 6d. earnest, leaving the pig in charge of the seller without placing any mark upon it. When he went to remove the pig, he was offered one 3s."worse" than the one he had purchased, and the seller refused to give back the 2s. 6d. The Chairman said he should either bring the man into court or summon him for next court day.

Patt M'ALOON v. Phil. CUSKER

Complainant is a caretaker to William Humphrys, Esq., J.P., D.L., Ballyhaise, and the summons was brought against the young lad for trespassing on one of Mr. Humphrys's plantations, in search of game, on Sunday, the 6th instant.

M'ALOON deposed that it is a common practice of the youths in the neighbourhood of Ballyhaise to enjoy the pleasures of the chase on Sundays. On Sunday, the 6th instant, defendant and a great many others--boys and men--trespassed on the plantation; and "started" a hare; "they had hounds, coolies, terriers and all sorts of vermin for the destruction of game with them;" knew none of them except defendant.....Defendant said he was out with a sick cow that morning, and merely looked on at "the boys and the dogs;" he stoutly denied that a hare was visible at all during the time he was there.....After considerable consultation, the Chairman informed the defendant that he had left himself liable to a penalty of £10 and a further penalty of £5 for the breach of the Sabbath. However, as he was a young sportsman--though a very illegitimate one--they would only impose a fine of 2s. 6d. and costs. The practice of hunting on the Sabbath day is a very common one, and they were determined to put a stop to it, and regretted that M'ALOON had not summoned an older offender, in order that they might impose a heavier penalty.

Edward CUSACK v. Felix M'KERNAN

This was a summons for trespass of thirteen head of cattle on complainant's clover and meadow. The trespass had been committed at various times, between the 28th of April and the 8th of May. It also appeared that defendant had challenged and insulted complainant for demanding trespass money.

The Court inflicted the full penalty, 13s. and costs.

Defendant who did not seem to hold the Court in any great veneration, said he would appeal if it cost him £5.


Bernard DOUGHTY was charged with assaulting Andrew BRADY, and Andrew BRADY was charged with an assault upon Bernard DOUGHTY; and both were charged with having, with others, been guilty of a riot.

The offence was proved by Sub-Constable M'GOWAN, who deposed that he saw the prisoners fighting with sticks in Stradone....Constable M'CARTHY and the Clerk gave the prisoners a good character.

The Chairman said it was a shame for respectable young men to act in such a manner, but, as the Court considered that they had no ill-will towards each other, and that they only fought in consequence of having taken a "disputatious drop," they would impose only a fine of 6d and costs.....The prisoners thanked their Worships, and paid the fine.

Paul LYNCH v. James BRADY

These affectionate friends--the Damon and Pythias of Clonervy--appeared before the Court under the following circumstances:--some time ago Jemmy's dog bit Paul's child, and on the case coming before the Court, an order was made that the dog should be destroyed. Jemmy promised to do so, but, it seems, was too much attached to his canine favourite to comply with the order, and when a firing party of the police went out to execute the death-warrant of "poor dog Tray," he was invisible--having, we suppose, received a friendly hint that the air of Clonervy was unsuited to his health. Be that as it may, in company with several other dogs, he lately attacked Paul; and the present summons was for non-compliance with the order above stated. Much cross-questioning, contradictory statements, and complimentary terms took place between Paul and his opponent, but finally the Court fined the latter 3s. 6d. and costs.

Edward M'DONNELL v. Peter BRADY

This was a claim to recover 1s. 6d. balance of wages for work done. Mr. BRADY deposed that he overpaid plaintiff, who did not perform the amount of work agreed by him. There being no evidence as to the agreement, the case was dismissed.

Peter BRADY v. Edward M'DONNELL

This was a summons against the plaintiff in the last case, for having used abusive and threatening language. But as Mr. BRADY could not swear that he apprehended a breach of the peace, the Court would not act in the matter and the summons was dismissed.

James REILLY was fined 2s. and costs for allowing four head of cattle to wander on the public road at Drummock.

The Guardians of the Poor of Cavan Union v. John M'GOVERN

The wife of the defendant was lately admitted to the workhouse in a state of destitution, which she declared was caused by the desertion of her husband, then in Scotland, and the Guardians directed that she should swear informations against him, and that a warrant should be issued for his apprehension.

The Porter stated that since swearing informations, the woman left the house, and has not since returned. It was discovered that she had made false statements respecting the length of time her husband was away from her. He is an industrious poor creature, and willing to support his wife.

Some of the police also gave M'GOVERN a good character, and the case against him was dismissed.

The Court then rose.


On the 10th inst., at St. Pancras Church, Kentishtown, London, Charlotte CHADWICK, second daughter of the last John William O'FALLON, Esq., of Drummallon, Co. Roscommon, to Charles A. TEALE, Esq., of Bradnich, Devonshire.

On the 11th inst., at Castlejordan Church, by the Rev. Thomas MARSHALL, Thomas JACKSON, sen., Esq., Rochelle House, Cullenswood avenue, Dublin, to Ellen, eldest daughter of the late Garret GILL, Esq., Castlejordan, Co. Meath.


On the 5th April, at Calcutta, after five days' illness, of cholera, George Alexander, aged 21, second son of the late George T. Bell BOOTH, Esq., of Drumcarbin, Co. Cavan.

On the 11th April, at Madeira, Sir Francis HOPKINS, Bart., of Athboy, in the county of Meath, and Rochfort, Westmeath, aged 46 years.

DEATH BY LIGHTNING--A poor man named CULLEN was killed by lightning, about half a mile from Cossdoney railway station, on Friday evening. It is a strange circumstance that two men on previous occasions met their death under similar circumstances in the same locality.


CASTLEBELLINGHAM (Co. Louth) Mar 14--At our fortnightly petty sessions, held before George FITZMAURICE, R.M., and William WOOLSEY, J.P., Esqrs., a most important case was heard, where the Rev. Mr. CALLAN, the parish priest, was summoned to disclose a secret of the confessional. The complainant in the case was a person named Mary KELLY, who charged one Patrick JOHNSON with having found and appropriated a sum of £26, lost by the complainant on the high road leading from Drumiskin to Lurgangreen in said county. The woman deposed that she had lost the money in June last, and that some short time ago Father CALLAN handed her £4 10s. restitution money. A young man proved that JOHNSON had showed him two ten pound notes, a three pound note, and three one pound notes, which corresponded with the notes lost by the complainant. JOHNSON, at the same time, told him he had found them on the road.

Father CALLAN was next about being sworn, when P. J. BYRNE, Esq., solicitor, addressing the bench, said that on the part of the clergyman he should put in a plea for declining to tell the whole truth, that he had received any information about the £4 10s. in the confessional. It was, he said, contrary to law to ask a priest to disclose information received by him under the seal of confession. To insist upon Father Callan so doing would be the means of preventing him from the medium of restoring to the owner ill-gotten property, and would put him in the position of a common informer. He read the opinion of Lord Chief Justice BEST, reported in RUSSELL v. CREWES, where that eminent judge said that he would never seek to compel a priest to disclose any communication made to him in the confessional.....Mr. FITZMAURICE said that he would not press the rev. gentleman to give evidence on the subject on that occasion, but he would keep the case open, and he trusted that the prosecutrix would be able, at a future period, to produce further evidence in reference to her lost money.

This case created considerable interest, from the great novelty of a Roman Catholic priest being summoned as a witness to disclose the secrets of the confessional.--Correspondent of Saunders.

May 26, 1860


KELLS, MAY 19--Quarrelling and waylaying have been more prevalent than usual lately in the fairs in the country districts. This week the magistrates have adjudicated upon several cases of this nature at the Moynalty and Trim Petty Sessions. On yesterday, at Moynalty, a serious case of rioting was heard before Thomas BARNES, J. A. FARRELL, Richard CHALOJER, and T. DERINZI, R.M., Esqrs. The party summoned was Patrick CURTIS, and he was charged by Constable KENNEDY, of the Kilmainhamwood Constabulary station, with fighting in Mr. CORBALLY's public house, on the fair day of Kilmainhamwood, the 5th instant. The evidence in this case went to show that a riot of a dangerous and expensive kind took place at Corbally's public house, and that the belligerents demolished everything of value they could lay their hands upon during the melee.....Jugs, glasses, and everything portable or frail were smashed and thrown about in confusion.....The evidence of the landlord, CORBALLY, was still stronger. He said that a party of seven or eight men rushed into the house, and attacked Patt CURTIS and his brother, Thomas CURTIS, who were at the time in conversation with him (CORBALLY). Witness was knocked down, and his whole place smashed. The ringleader of the party was named MATHEWS, from Newcastle, whom he intended to proceed against for the losses.....A second charge was also heard by the bench against Thomas CURTIS, but CORBALLY deposed that any blows struck, if he struck any, were in his defence. The bench decided on fining Patt CURTIS in 3s. 6d. and costs. The other was acquitted.

The Trim Sessions were held before the Hon. H. S. ROWLEY, J. E. BANNON, R.M., and William THOMPSON, Esqrs. Three men named MASTERSON, BYRNE and FARRELL were charged by John FARRELL with having assaulted him outside the public house of one EVANS, at Rathmolyon, on 20th April. In this case it appeared that the complainant had been in the public house during a part of the evening and that the traversers seemed to be waiting outside for him. Mr. GOODMAN, solicitor, defended the parties, but the case was fully proved against FARRELL, who was sentenced to three weeks' imprisonment. The other two men were discharged. A man named Denis COTTRAL was found guilty of assaulting Patrick MURPHY and James DUNNE, at Trim, on the fair day of that town, on the 8th instant. He was ordered to pay a fine of £1, or to go to gaol for a fortnight. The third case was that of Private James SULLIVAN, of the Royal Meath Militia, who complained of one John SHERROCK, of Doolistown, for having on the fair day of Trim, the 8th instant, committed on him a grievous assault. The militiaman proved the assault, and SHERROCK was dealt with by the Bench similar to the former delinquent....The case of the four men charged with having, on the fair day of Rathmolyon, perpetrated a violent assault on Thomas RORKE, of Kildalkey, by which his life was endangered, he has been returned for trial to the ensuing summer assizes. The parties, on application, were admitted to bail.--SAUNDERS


Before Theophilus Thompson, Esq., J.P., William Babington, Esq., J.P., Nathaniel Montgomery, Esq., J.P., John Garnett Tatlow, Esq., J.P., Joseph Story, Esq., Captain Cumming, J.P., Captain Phillips, J.P., and _____ Dease, Esq., J.P.

Julia BRADY and Susan BRADY v. Pat. BRADY, Rose BRADY, and Catherine REILLY

This was a family quarrel. Julia BRADY is the mother of Susan BRADY and Patrick BRADY; Rose BRADY is the wife, and Catherine REILLY the servant of the latter. The summons was brought against the defendants for having used abusive and threatening language towards the complainants, and for having broken the window of their room. The ill-feeling which occasioned the quarrel appeared to have arisen from misunderstanding regarding the right of the old woman (who is a widow)--and her daughter to share of the house and farm formerly held by her husband, and now occupied by her son and his wife. Much time was spent in endeavouring to arrive at the truth on this point, but the Court finally decided upon confining itself to the charge of threatening language and stone-throwing, and this having been proved by the testimony of the two complainants and a man named John ROBERTS, Patrick BRADY was ordered to find bail to keep the peace--himself in £10, and two sureties in £5 each, or in default, to be imprised for one month.


The complaint in this case was that defendant's two goats trespassed on plaintiff's potato ground and destroyed 800 of plants. The case having been proved, the Court fined defendant 10s. and costs.

Anne SMITH v. Michael COYLE

This was a civil bill process for 6s. 8d., balance of £2 12s. 6d. amount of a half year's wages from November 1859 to December 1860.

Plaintiff deposed that she had received all her wages except the sum claimed in the process, which defendant told her he would stop in lieu of some days on which she had been absent from work.....Defendant said she was "the worst-tongued girl in the whole county, and no one could make a hand of her.....he never turned her away, and never beat her, but on one occasion, when greatly provoked, he gave her a kick.

The Chairman told him that he had no right to do so; if the girl misconducted herself, he could have brought her before the Court....The Court considered there were faults on both sides; and gave a decree for 2s. 8d., with costs....

Bernard M'INTYRE v. Bernard M'LENNON

This was a civil bill process for £1 18s., amount of 33 days' ploughing, at 1s. per day.

Mrs. M'LENNON (who hired plaintiff) did not dispute the number of days which plaintiff had worked for her; she deposed, however, that she had agreed to give him but 10d per day and his diet, as the weather was wet during a great portion of the time he worked for her..she produced a "set-off" against the amount claimed by plaintiff for shop goods and use of a horse for ploughing, according to which he owed her 1s. 4d, instead of having any money due to him.

The case was accordingly dismissed.


The defendant--a well-dressed young woman--was brought up, in custody, charged with having stolen a pair of blankets, the property of complainant.

Evidence having been gone into, the Court decided upon sending the case for trial to the Quarter Sessions; the prisoner to be admitted to bail....

Thomas HESLIN v. John PRATT

This was a charge of assault alleged to have been committed by the defendant on the 15th inst., near Drumconnick. There was no evidence to sustain it, however, and complainant's statements were flatly contradicted by two witnesses, one of whom (an old woman) he had summoned to sustain his case, who deposed that he made use of impertinent language to defendant and his wife, as they were walking quietly home, and "collared" defendant when remonstrated with. The case was accordingly dismissed.


Complainant is bailiff to Lord Annesley, and the summons was brought against defendant for having, at Clonervy, on the 13th instant, cut and carried away a tree, the property of Lord Annesley. Paul LYNCH (one of Lord Annesley's tenants) deposed that he saw defendant cutting the tree...Defendant acknowledged that he had cut and carried away the tree, but unless he did so, in a few hours he would have had no shelter except the side of a ditch; the wall of his cabin was falling, and he had no other means of propping it than by cutting the little tree for that purpose; is willing to pay for the tree. LYNCH corroborated this statement.

The Chairman (after consultation with his brother magistrates) informed M'PARLAND that he had no right, under any circumstances, to cut down Lord Annesley's trees; and he had left himself liable to a penalty of £5, or three months' imprisonment. However, as it was the first case of the kind which had come before them from that district, and as he bore a good character, and had acknowledged and regretted his offence, they would deal mercifully with him, and only order him to pay 6d. as the value of the tree, and 6d. fine.

John MAGRATH and Mary MAGRATH v. Patrick SHERIDAN and James EVANS

Defendants were charged with having assaulted complainants in Bridge street, on the night of Sunday, the 13th inst.

John MAGRATH deposed that he was going home on the above night, between ten and eleven o'clock; saw the two defendants at Gannon's corner; EVANS "gave some impudence" as she was passing; asked him why he did so; saw SHERIDAN pulling his hat over his face, and turning up the collar of his coat, so as to disguise himself, and coming towards him, as if to join EVANS...his sister was passing at the time, and she told them not to interfere with him, as he wished to have no dispute with them; they both struck him and knocked him down;Sheridan kicked him when down, but Evans fell across him, and partly saved him from the kicking....

Mary MAGRATH deposed that she was sent out on an errand, with her father's apprentice boy, when she saw defendants attack her brother...The little boy who was with the last witness testified to the same effect.

SHERIDAN had a cross-charge of assault against MAGRATH. According to his statement, MAGRATH was being dragged home in a state of drunkenness by his sister, and as he was passing, commenced to abuse EVANS; in order to avoid MAGRATH, he (SHERIDAN) turned away, but MAGRATH called out that he knew him very well...EVANS made a similar statement, but was not examined on oath..

The Court having consulted, the Chairman said they did not believe a word of Sheridan's statement, and accordingly dismissed his summons. The charge against him was clearly proved, and he must be a cowardly, unmanly fellow to strike a weak, defenceless woman in the brutal manner he had done. The sentence of the Court was that himself and Evans be imprisoned for one month.

The prisoners begged that the Court would accept a fine in lieu of imprisonment, as otherwise they would lose their situations as car-drivers. This was at first refused, but after some consultation, their Worships imposed a fine of £1 each, with costs, one third of the fine to be given to complainants.

Mr. GREY, SHERIDAN's employer, paid the fine for him, and gave him an excellent character for quietness and sobriety.

Michael M'KENNA v. Patrick KERR

This was a very bad assault case. The complainant was coming out of BROGAN's public-house, in Bridge-street, between 10 and 11 o'clock on the night of the 15th inst., and had only proceeded a few yards when defendant, without the slightest provocation--he having never seen him before--struck him several times with a heavy stick, cutting him in a frightful manner. Constable STEEL, (illegible) the movements of defendant and his party, as they appeared rather suspicious, and witnessed the assault, arrested him and conveyed him to the barracks. On being arrested, he at once dropped the stick. Complainant was lying bleeding and insensible on the ground....Defendant laid all the blame on the whiskey he had taken.

Mr. ROE said defendant was in his employment for three years, during which time he bore a good character. Constable STEEL said he thought it right to state that Constable LAURENCE, of Crossdoney, had given him a good character; but he was rather abusive to himself when he arrested him.....The Chairman, at the termination of the case, said he had admitted the charge against him, which was clearly proved by complainant and the Constable. It was in the power of the Court to send him to gaol for two months, or for trial to the Quarter Sessions, where he would probably be sentenced to six months' imprisonment; but in consequence of the good character he had received, and to give the poor man he had so brutally injured some compensation, they would only impose a fine of 10s. with 1l. costs, or only month's imprisonment--the costs to go to complainant.

Hugh M'NERNEY v. Patrick GALLIGAN and Bernard REILLY

This was another assault. M'NERNEY was coming out of KINGS' public-house, about 11 o'clock, on the night of the 15th inst., the two defendants were outside the door; REILLY gave him a kick, and GALLIGAN, at the same moment, struck him with a stick, when they were arrested by Sub-Constable SHELLY. M'NERNEY offered to forgive them, but the Court fined REILLY 10s., and GALLIGAN 5s., with costs.

Thomas TILSON processed a man named Robert CALLWELL for £1 12s. 6d., price of a half-year's grazing for defendant's cows. Defendant objected to pay, as the grass was very bad....The Court gave a decree, but defendant said he would appeal.

Charles SHERIDAN processed James BRADY for £1 10s. 10d., amount of smiths' work done for him.--Decree given.

The Court then rose.


Before John H. Adams, Esq., J.P., and B. S. Adams, Esq., J.P.

Ambrose FORESIDE, as representative of Sir George HUTSON, processed John CLARKE for 15s, money due for use and occupation of turf bank. He is the person who transacts business for the above named gentleman, and defendant promised to pay him the sum claimed, but was now endeavouring to avoid or rather evade doing so.

The defence was that he never promised or agreed to give any money; that he was eleven years in the enjoyment of the bog though not in actual possession.....The Bench gave a decree for 15s and costs, but allowed defendant the liberty of appeal, which was taken advantage of.

James and Patrick WARD summoned Robert MEEHIN, Brien WARD, and Margaret MEEHIN for assaulting and otherwise annoying them. They are all connected by marriage and otherwise, and the present is only one of the many feuds that almost continually exist among them. The Bench bound them to keep the peace for twelve months, or be imprisoned for a fortnight.

Bridget M'INREES processed Thomas REILLY for 1l. wages. She was hired with him for 6½ and got but 5l. during that time; she was sure he owed the sum claimed, but believed he thought otherwise, and did not at the same time intend to cheat her; he was under a mistake believing he paid but did not.

During the time Biddy was telling her story Mr. REILLY stood very mannerly, and had to be interrogated by the Bench before he broke silence, and when asked why he refused to pay the girl her wages he replied that he "did not owe her a penny," in proof of which he produced a book containing entries of scraps of money given for shoes for plaintiff at different time, and other small items which he had written a day or two before. Their Worships attached very little credit to the "book" and asked if Mrs. REILLY could be used as a witness in the case; she was witness to the money being paid, and he therefore would go for her....Upon entering the place where witnesses are examined, Mrs. REILLY very humbly dropped a courtsy and when asked about the matter, said she was present in November last when the disputed pound was paid to Biddy; her husband threw it upon the ground to her, and to make the recollection of it more positive, her sister was going to America at the time. The process was dismissed.

Sub-Constable James CARTEN and others of the constabulary of Shercock, charged Patrick DEMPSEY, Michael CLEARKEN, James CROSSIN, Joseph GARVEY, and Edward and Owen MULLEN with rioting in the fair of Shercock. Some of them, CLEARKIN and CROSSIN in particular, were charged with attempting to rescue the prisoners and furiously attacking the police so as to do them bodily harm.

The case occupied the Court more than an hour.

CLEARKIN, as described by the several witnesses, was most violent; he kicked the Sergeant and several others of the men while they attempted to bring him to the barracks, and CROSSIN having escaped arrest, owing to the pressure of the crowd, was again caught in the act of attempting to rescue other prisoners. There were about 600 or 700 people in the crowd, and the Sergeant stated that in the conflict with the prisoners, together with the pressure of the mob, he and the men had received great injury....CLEARKIN kicked and beat him and sub-Constable M'CABE and James DOLAN in the same way, and also sub-Constable PHILLIPS.....

DEMPSEY said he was drunk; CLEARKIN went to help him to get away without being taken by the police, and was taken prisoner and ill-treated by them for doing so, and CROSSIN only went to see the fight as also GARVEY, and the MULLENS did not interfere at all.

Mr. Adams gave them a good character, and what they prized more--their liberty.

CLEARKIN, one month's imprisonment, CROSSIN, a fortnight--both with hard labour. DEMPSEY and GARVEY were fined 10s. each.

Sub-Constable M'CABE charged Hugh SMITH and Thomas M'CAUL with fighting in the fair of Shercock. They are two little fellows about fifteen years each. The dispute arose about a young woman, and as they were under the influence of alcohol they thought they'd have a few clouts.

Mr. Adams supposed they were practising a little like Heenan and desired to know which of they personated Sayers. They were discharged with an admonition.

There were a few other trifling cases, but they were of an uninteresting character, and the Court adjourned.


On the 13th instant, at Castlegar, Ahascragh, the Hon. Catherine FITZGERALD, sister of the late Lord FITZGERALD and VESEL, aged 70.


Dr. BRODIE, the new Inspector appointed by the Poor-Law Commissioners in the room of Mr. ROBINSON, inspected the Workhouse last week. He went carefully through the various departments....and expressed the highest satisfaction at the order, cleanliness, and general good management of the house. There is nothing unusual in this circumstance, however, for we believe that since the appointment of Mr. MULLIGAN, the present Master, no Inspector has found fault with his manner of conducting the business of the house......The "teachers Mary MULLIGAN and Eliza SMITH" have at last found favour in the eyes of the present critical District Inspector of National Schools, and, since last inspection, the "literary attainments and method of conducting the school" have risen from "middling" to "fair".......We doubt if, as regards the school arrangements and general management, there is a better conducted Workhouse in Ireland.

NEW BARRISTERS--The following gentlemen were called to the bar on Tuesday last:--William Joseph CORRIGAN, Esq., A.B., T.C.D., third son of Dominick John CORRIGAN, M.D., of Merrion-square, in the city of Dublin. Andrew Marshall PORTER, Esq., A.B., Queen's University, eldest son of the Rev. John PORTER, of Belfast.

County Cavan Newspaper Transcription Project

Ireland Home Page
County Cavan

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.