Cavan Observer
Published in Cavan, county Cavan
April 6, 1861


(From Our Correspondent.)

These Sessions commenced this day before P. M. MURPHY, Esq., Chairman of the County. There were upwards of three hundred civil bills entered, a great portion of which were undefended, and but few of them contained any matter of public importance except the following which, from the respectability of the parties and the extraordinary nature of the case, created a good deal of excitement in the locality:--


This was an action for the recovery of a bank note, value of £20, which plaintiff alleged had been taken by defendant from his (plaintiff's) wife, and converted to his own use, upon an occasion when she had gone into his shop to purchase goods. Mr. B. Armstrong stated plaintiff's case, and produced the following witnesses:--

Mary M'MAHON--On the evening of Saturday, 1st February, I went into Mr. MAXWELL's shop to purchase groceries, and tendered him a £20 note in payment, expecting to receive my change; Mr. MAXWELL, however, put the note into his pocket saying "This is the very note you asked me to change for you this day week, and you went away taking both the note and the change;" I said, Oh, Mr. MAXWELL, how can you say so? I only changed a £5 note on this day week, and besides that £20 note was never in my possession till my husband gave it to me a few minutes ago, having just got it from Mr. BOYD;" my brother-in-law, James CASSIDY, was with me, and confirmed my statement...I then went to my husband and told him what had happened; he also went to Mr. MAXWELL, but he would not give up the note. Cross-examined by Mr. James Armstrong.....

Patrick M'MAHON--I am husband of the last witness (corroborated wife's testimony)... Cross-examined...

James CASSIDY, the brother-in-law to the last witness, went with Mrs. M'MAHON to Mr. MAXWELL's on Friday evening, February 1st, described what had taken place on that occasion... Cross-examined...

Defendant examined by Mr. ARMSTRONG--On the 25th January plaintiff came to my shop, and asked me for the change of a note, which she took out of her purse, and handed to me. I said, "yes," and went over to the cash box to get it for her; but on examining the note I found it was for £20, and I then told her I had not so much change in the house, having made a lodgement in the bank a few days previous; I handed her back the note, which she put back into her purse, and put that into her breast; she left the shop, but at the door she again returned and pressed me for change, saying it would be a great accommodation to her in the market; I then said I would try what I could do, and going to the cash box I gave her the change thus--two £5 notes, five £1 notes, and £5 gold; I never thought at the moment of asking her for the note, but in about an hour afterwards I had occasion to go to the cash box for change of a pound, and I then discovered my error; I immediately went out and walked up toward the flax market, hoping to find her, and quite satisfied that I should be given the money on explaining to her the mistake....I did not see her again until the morning Friday, February 1st....(more testimony)...

His Worship said it was not necessary for him to trouble the jury with many observations; they had the facts before them, and the result lay in their hands; but he could not conclude without again expressing his opinion that there was not, or could not, be any mistake, there must have been deliberate perjury on one side or the other.

The Jury retired, and after a short deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and, at the same time, stated that they could not concur in his Worship's view of the case; they believed that Mr. MAXWELL had really lost a note, and had made a mistake as to the party through whom that loss had occurred.


Magistrates present:--Theophilus THOMPSON and William BABINGTON, Esqrs.

Thomas GALLIGAN v. Robert FEGAN.

This was a summons for £1 12s., 6d., wages earned by plaintiff as defendant's hired servant, the engagement commencing in January 1861, and to terminate on the 14th of May next--defendant having beaten and turned away defendant.

Plaintiff, a smart-looking young lad, about sixteen years of age, stated, in reply to the Bench, that he did know the nature of an oath; that he was born at Corweelis; and had never been at school.

His mother corroborated this statement, and pleaded poverty as an excuse for rearing her son in such ignorance.

The defendant was then sworn, and gave a very bad account of plaintiff's conduct, while in his employment, offering to produce witnesses to prove that he had never beaten or turned him away.

The Court ordered plaintiff to go back to his master, and honestly finish his time with him. If summoned for misconduct and the charge he sustained against him, he would leave himself liable to three months' imprisonment. Defendant might deduct his expenses, and the nine days plaintiff was away, when paying him.

Bernard BRADY v. James MARKEY

Complainant deposed that he hired defendant on the 4th of March, engaging to give him 7½d. per day and his diet until the 1st of May; defendant put in sixteen days, and then left him.

Defendant said he had not left complainant at all, and that the latter had merely summoned him on suspicion.

Complainant said that on Tuesday, the 25th March, he had been in Arvagh; on his return he heard that defendant was working with a man named Hugh M'COLLUM, to whose place he went, and found defendant shovelling oats there. Defendant told him he would go back to him no more, and that he might "make his best of it." Defendant had not since returned to his work.

Defendant admitted having shovelled oats for M'COLLUM on the day in question, but it was for the purpose of re-paying one shilling which M'COLLUM had lent him.

The Court ordered him to return to his master, and serve him honestly and faithfully, if he did not want to pay a visit to the gaol. Complainant was to deduct his costs and the time defendant had been absent, when paying him.

Thomas TEEVAN v. Hugh LEE

The complaint in this case was that defendant had wilfully injured complainant's mearing fence. Defendant acknowledged the offence, stating that he did not think he was doing any injury at the time, but he was willing to repair the damage. At complainant's request, the case was postponed for a fortnight, in order to give defendant time to repair the injury done to the fence.


The announcement that Matthew FITZPATRICK was required created a titter in court, and his appearance excited no little laughter. He stood charged with having been drunk and disorderly in Ballyhaise on the 22d of March. In one hand he clutched a hat, the original cylindrical shape of which had long since vanished, and in the other a faded cotton pocket handkerchief, to dam "the swelling river in his eye," should the Court be inexorable, or wave in triumph in case they pardoned his "strong weakness." His "first appeal" was in the school-boy style, but informing the Court that he "begged their pardons twenty times." The constable having recounted his offence and capture in Ballyhaise, the Knight remained in an extremely "brown study" for some time, and seemed surprised that the "case for the Crown" had so soon terminated. He then began--"My darlin' Thompson, I'll tell you how it was--I will...But tell me what to say--do, Babinton darlin' tell me what I'm to say; God sees, I went to pay KENNEDY of Ballyhaise three shillings, and the day was wet, and we sat round KENNEDY's fire kitchen, and he had three or four rounds of punch, and I wasn't able to bear it--I wasn't, my darlin' Lapier comin' for me with two guns, what were never seen in my family afore. Oh, my darlin' Thompson, give me one request. Tell me will I live? Do you think will I live?....

The Court, having ascertained that Matthew had been twelve hours in custody, allowed him to be discharged, after cautioning him not to expect equal leniency on his next visit.

Matthew, waving his pocket handkerchief--"Oh, my blessin's attend you! The Heaven be your bed--Darlin' Thompson, you may hang me on Cavan gallows if ever I come before you again!....


Catherine DEVINE was charged, on informations, with child desertion. She did not deny the offence, but argued that she only left the child (an illegitimate one) at the house of the father, in hopes that the latter would contribute to its maintenance, as he had previously done, and that she left a woman near the door to watch the child, lest any accident might happen it. The Court, under these circumstances, and as the prisoner had been a few days in custody, discharged her, after a severe caution against repeating the offence, as she could take legal proceedings against the father of the child in another court if she wished; the law did not allow her to leave it forcibly at his house. Had the child been sent to the Workhouse, and received but one meal a day there, after she had deserted it, she would be liable to three months' imprisonment.

George GALOGLY v. Patrick SMITH

This was a process for 10s., balance of £ 12s. 6d., rent of con-acre ground. A servant of Mr. GALOGLY proved the debt. Defendant did not appear, and a decree was given for the sum claimed, with 3s. 6d. costs.

Laurence SMITH, of Pells v. John COLLUM, of Stradone

The complaint in this case was that defendant, at Mullamugavan, did steal a quantity of complainant's turf.

Complainant said his witness had gone to Scotland, and he had no evidence to sustain the complaint. Defendant's father had agreed to settle the matter by leaving it to the decision of two men, to which he (complainant) consented; but as soon as defendant's father found that the witness had gone to Scotland, he refused to give him any satisfaction.

The Court inquired if he could swear that the witness had gone to Scotland to avoid the service of the summons, as in that case he could get a warrant for his arrest. Complainant said he could not do so.

The Court informed that the case should be "nilled", but if the witness came back, he could again bring the summons.

Edward FEGAN v. Thomas PATTERSON;
Robert COWAN v. John REILLY:
and John REILLY v. Abagain DELAP

These were summonses for nuisance. The other cases arose out of that of Mr. FEGAN against Mr. PATTERSON, which has been so often before the Court.--After a lengthened hearing, the Court imposed a fine of 10s. and costs on each of the defendants, the fines not to be levied for a fortnight, in case all the parties go to Mr. HOPEWELL, assistant county surveyor, and adopt such means as he shall deem necessary for the abatement of the nuisance.

The Court then rose.


On Monday the Easter Sessions for this division commenced before P. J. BLAKE, Esq., Chairman, and Captain BUTLER, R.M., Captain A. NIXON, M.D. NIXON, and J. G. V. PORTER, Esqrs., magistrates.

The following gentlemen were sworn on the grand jury, vis:--Messrs. E. H. INNES, Foreman; Hugh COPELAND, Wm. ARTHUR, Wm. GILBERT, John LEMON, Wm. GRAHAM, Wm. CARSON, Robert HUSSEY, Robert GORDON, George BLACK, S. LITTLE, Wm. BETTY, John KEYS, William ROBINSON, J. JOHNSTON, George HURST, James COALTER, Christopher WILSON, Geroge WILLIS, Wm. LOWRY, S. DOUGLAS, E. GAMBLE, and Thomas VERNER.

His Worship congratulated them on the extreme lightness of the calendar.

Mary Anne MULLAN, charged with bigamy, was brought up to have her bail renewed, and the case was transferred to the assizes.

Bernard TRACY was indicted for stealing a saddle, the property of James RUTHERFORD. The prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to two months' imprisonment.

Henry and John WEST were charged with an assault on Wm. REYNOLDS. The affair arose out of a disputed right of way; the evidence was contradictory, and the matter was referred to arbitration.

Christopher MARTIN, Anne MARTIN, and Mary FOY were charged with riot, affray, and assault on people named MAGUIRE. It appeared that the parties were neighbours, that there was ill-feeling between them, and that it rose one time to a regular fight. The prisoners were found guilty, and Christopher MARTIN sentenced to two months' imprisonment; the women to 24 hours each.

Two others were tried, one for assault, the other for rescue, and both acquitted.

This ended the crown business, which was little more than nominal.

There 731 civil bills and six ejectments.--Fermanagh Impartial Reporter.

ENISKILLEN PARISH--The Rev. Mr. IRVINE, of Killyhevlin, has been appointed a curate of this parish, in the stead of the Rev. Mr. M'LAURIN, now of Limerick.

(Before E. MOLYNEUX, Esq., Q.C., Chairman)


Mr. WALL, barrister, applied to the Court on behalf of Barrett, the plaintiff in the second case, and the defendant in the first, for liberty to enter his civil bill, after the court sat, upon the ground that he could not procure the original from the process-server in time.

Mr. HINDS, attorney, as the senior member of the attorney's bar, objected to counsel being allowed to practice in civil bills unless instructed by an attorney. It was the first time such a thing had occurred in Ireland.

Mr. WALL said that he came there advisedly to assert the rights of his profession; that he had corresponded with Mr. LEAHY, Q.C., upon the subject, and had Mr. LEAHY's letter establishing his right, and concurring with his views, that the bar were too subservient to the attorneys, and he would insist on practising without one.

Mr. J. A. CURRAN, who happened to be in court, begged to interpose, and hoped Mr. WALL would not persevere in such an attempt. He (Mr. CURRAN) had never known or heard of such a thing before, and was sure that no member of his profession would, upon consideration, persevere in it.

Mr. WALL said that was a matter of taste, that he stood upon his rights, and was determined to do it.

Mr. HINDS, in reply, insisted that it was not a legal right, and referred to the provisions of the Civil Bill Act, and the strong language of Lord Campbell and the English County Court Judges, in denouncing such an attempt as illegal.

The Chairman said, that so far as his experience went he had never known of an instance of such a thing being allowed; and his opinion was that it ought not to be. The first party to be considered was the public. The parties to a civil bill had a right to appear either in person or by attorney, and to have the aid of counsel when properly instructed, but they should be protected from illegal practices. He therefore declined to hear Mr. WALL; but as the matter was of much importance be would bring it under the notice of the highest legal authority. For the present he must act on his own judgment, and refused to hear Mr. WALL. As the party in the present instance had been misled, he should put the case at the foot of the list, so as to allow him time to have whatever professional assistance he thought fit.

Mr. WALL then returned the civil bills to his client.--Meath Herald.

April 13, 1861



Magistrates present:--William BABINTON, Esq., Chairman; Robert ERSKINE, Esq., and Captain CARDEN.


This was a summons for 16s. 3½d. balance of wages earned by plaintiff as defendant's hire labourer, commencing in 1859, and ending Spring, 1861. Plaintiff's statement was to the effect that defendant engaged to give him 6d. a day and his diet for 14 days, and 1s. a day and his diet for the remainder of the time he worked for him.

Mr. John ARMSTRONG appeared for defendant. The grounds of defence were that plaintiff was engaged at 6d. a day and his diet, but that no subsequent agreement was made with him, and FARRELLY never heard that plaintiff claimed any more until he was finally settling with him.

FARRELLY was examined to this effect, and a witness corroborated some portions of his evidence.

The case was dismissed.


This was a civil bill process for 16s., 10½d, 10 s. cash lent, and the remainder for shop goods. Defendant did not appear, but service of the civil bill having been proved, and plaintiff sworn, a decree was given for the amount claimed, with 3s., 6d. costs.

William FEGAN v. Thomas ARMSTRONG

This summons was brought to recover possession of a house held by defendant as weekly tenant, which tenancy terminated by notice to quit and demand for possession. A decree to possession was given.

William FEGAN v. John M'PARTLAND

A civil bill process for 8s., 6d., price of hay sold and delivered. Decree, with the usual costs, was given.


The defendants were charged with having on the 18th of February, at Shantomon, cut, damaged, and stolen an oak tree, the property of complainant. FITZPATRICK is a servant to BRADY (sic), who is a tenant to Lord Annesley.

Mr. John ARMSTRONG appeared for Lord Annesley and W. A. MOORE, Esq., J.P., his lordship's agent and relative, was also in attendance.

FITZPATRICK did not attend, but service of the summons was proved. The other defendant appeared.

Mr. Armstrong stated the case,and examined Paul LYNCH, who deposed that he is in charge of the trees on the Clonervy and Shantomon portion of Lord Annesley's estate; knows FITZPATRICK; often saw him working in BRADY's employment; was coming into Cavan on the 18th of February, about seven o'clock in the morning; saw an oak tree cut, about six or seven perches from BRADY's house; when returning from Cavan, about three o'clock in the evening, saw a portion of the tree lying on BRADY's "street;" had no conversation with BRADY on the subject, but had with FITZPATRICK; BRADY was not present at this conversation (question overruled); could not exactly tell the value of the tree, but it was worth 1s.

BRADY said he "could plainly show to the noble court" that he was not stealing the tree in question; the fact of allowing it to remain where LYNCH saw it was sufficient to prove that he was not hiding it; for the last twenty years he has cut stumps and trees upon his own land; he has a right to do so according to his agreement with his original landlord, and when the property was purchased by Lord Annesley, he was bound to execute a lease to him (BRADY), giving him the right to cut trees and turf for his own use, but not for the purpose of selling; Mr. MOORE had refused to execute a lease of this kind, and had sent him a copy of one that was not as it should be; and He (BRADY) went to Dublin, and showed it to Mr. WALLACE, the law agent, who told him to return the lease to Mr. MOORE, and get a lease from him with a right to cut timber "and other deperations.".....

Towards the conclusion of the case, BRADY applied for a postponement for a week, as he had no legal assistance, but his application was refused.

Mr. Armstrong said there was another and more serious charge against BRADY, which they did not wish to go into until the Court had decided the first case. After considerable consultation the Court decided that as BRADY could give no excuse for what he had done, except the bare allegation, without any proof, that he had a right to cut timber, he should pay a fine of £1 1s., and costs, in order to give him the right to appeal, and that FITZPATRICK, who only acted under BRADY's directions, should pay a fine of 6d. and costs.

The Clerk said that he would be obliged to serve the notice of appeal upon Lord Annesley at Castlewellan, and could not let BRADY fulfill his recognizances until he lodge a sufficient sum to serve this notice. BRADY expressed his readiness to comply with all necessary forms.

Same v. Same

In this case the defendants were charged with having, at Clonervy, on the 23rd of February, cut, damaged, and stolen an ash tree, the property of complainant.

Paul LYNCH examined--On the night of the 23rd of February was in Phil BRADY's house; Brady was not present, but his was and son were; Brady afterwards came in, and in consequence of observations he made, witness went to the portion of the lands of Clonervy held by Mr. George GRAHAM, and saw Has, BRADY, the defendant, with his mare and cart, and servant (FITZPATRICK) on the lands; Brady was putting an ash tree, which had just been cut on his cart; there was another of the trees nearly cut; it was then about nine or ten o'clock at night; part of the tree was on the cart; Fitzpatrick went away when he saw witness coming; Brady also wanted to get away; told Brady he might as well put up a full load, for he had been caught stealing the tree; Brady asked witness did he catch him cutting the tree, and witness replied that he caught him stealing it; Brady then said that it was some cow stakes he was after buying; on Sunday morning got part of the tree in the field; Brady took the rest away on his cart.....

Philip BRADY deposed that on the night of the 23rd of February, he met defendant about seven o'clock; it was not dark at the time; BRADY passed by witness's door; about an hour afterwards witness was in his own bog when he heard a noise such as would be made by cutting a brush or tree; saw LYNCH afterwards in witness's house; witness's wife said to LYNCH that as he had seen no person he could not summon any one; and that it did not "fit him" to go to "trouble himself about it;" she said this because LYNCH was in bad health; LYNCH replied that he "would take a pin and summon ' Jemmy the Tanner;" (a nickname by which defendant is known) in consequence of his brother processing him (LYNCH); witness did not see defendant about the place where the tree was cut at all.

The case having terminated, the Court fined defendant in the sum of £2, or in default to be imprisoned for one month, with hard labour.

Brady gave notice of appeal in this case also.

Same v. Michael BRADY

The defendant was charged with having, at Shantomon, on the 23rd of March, cut, damaged, and stolen a sycamore tree, the property of complainant; and with having on the 25th of March, had a portion of said tree in his possession, knowing same to have been stolen.....

(this case similar to the preceding one)

Mr. Thomas REILLY was called upon by defendant and when sworn, said defendant was a tenant to Lord Lanesborough, and, on the entire estate, there was not a more honest or respectable man.

Mr. Armstrong said he was not instructed to impeach defendant's character, but, unfortunately, some tenants did not consider the cutting of a tree a crime.

The Court dismissed the case.

Bernard WALLS v. Jane BRADY

The defendant was charged with having injured and carried away a portion of complainant's fence. The charge was clearly proved, and she was sentenced to pay a fine of 5s., or be imprisoned for a week. She was afterwards discharged, however, at the solicitation of Mr. WALLS.


This was a charge of turf stealing, and was clearly proved. With the exception of Mary CONNOLLY, the defendants are mere children.

Mr. Thomas REILLY said the complainant and others had to pay £12 an acre for bog at Butlersbridge, and to come seven or eight miles to cut and bring home their turf. As they were unable to keep a regular watch on the bog, they were shamefully plundered--Mary CONNOLLY being one of the most noted turf stealers in the district.

Mary CONNOLLY said she had never been "caught" before, and would have not stolen the turf if she could have got any to purchase.

The mother of one of the little boys pleaded for him, and alleged he was innocent.

The Chairman said the defendants had left themselves liable to a heavy punishment, but as they were young, he did not think it would be conducive to their welfare to send them to prison. However, the punishment he was about to impose, though light, might serve as a warning to others; they should each pay a fine of 2s. 6d., or be imprisoned for 48 hours. As to Mary CONNOLLY, although he would make no exception in her case, if she were again found guilty of the same offence, she should be imprisoned for three months.

The defendants were allowed a week to pay the fines.

The remaining cases were of a trifling character.

CAVAN MILITIA--Mr. D. DUNCAN, formerly of the 1st Royals, and recently of the Tyrone Militia, has been appointed Bugle Major of this regiment, in which capacity he has, of course, charge of the regimental band. Since his appointment he has been zealous in his duties, and a marked improvement has taken place in the instrumentation of those under his charge, as was evidenced on Tuesday last, when the band paraded the town during the fair.

SUDDEN DEATH--On the morning of Monday last Mr. Thomas PATTERSON, publican of this town, was found dead in his bed. Mr. PATTERSON was about sixty-two years of age and had served in the 81st Regiment. He had been complaining of some slight indisposition for a few days previous to his death, but on Sunday walked about, and appeared to be in his usual health, and did not complain of indisposition during the day. Mrs. Patterson rose early, and on her return to the bed-room addressed some observations to her husband. Alarmed at his not replying, she went to the bed-side, and, to her horror, found that he was dead. Dr. MALCOMSON was at once sent for, but, unfortunately, his skill could effect nothing--life being extinct.

THE GLENVEAGH MURDER--EVICITION OF MR. ADAIR'S TENANTRY--On Wednesday a large number of police passed through this town on their return from the county Donegal, whither they had been sent for the purpose of preserving the peace during the eviction of a number of Mr. John G. ADAIR's tenantry, in the townland of Derryveagh. The cause of this wholesale eviction was that Mr. ADAIR believed he had reason to suspect that the tenants on the Derryveagh portion of his property, or some of them, had complicity in the barbarous murder of Mr. MURRAY, his agent. Forty-five families, numbering about 280 individuals, were evicted. The police describe the scene as most heartrending. The "Derry Guardian" says the greater portion of those evicted are in abject poverty, and will have to go to the Workhouse. About 200 police were present--50 belonging to the Reserve force, 20 from Roscommon, and the remainder from other stations.

TESTIMONIAL--On Friday last the friends of Mr. John FORDE, lately, and for more than thirty years, teacher of the Lisbellaw National School, presented him with a very complimentary address, to which he made a suitable reply, in the Court-house of that village, after which some seventy persons, many from a considerable distance, sat down to tea, and enjoyed themselves pleasantly...

CHILD DESERTION--On Saturday morning two men found a very pretty and neatly dressed child on a creel in a deserted house at Chanterhill. There attention was attracted by its cries. There is no clue, we believe, to the perpetrator of the crime--Enniskillen Reporter.


April 7th, at Nice, the lady of Captain Edward FLEMING, of a son.

April 5th, at Lacken, Ballinagh, the wife of James REILLY, Esq., of a son.

On the 5th instant, the wife of Mr. S. BEATTY, Willoughby-place, Enniskillen, of a daughter.


On the 10th instant, at St. Peter's Church, Dublin, by the Right Rev., the Lord Bishop of Kilmore (father of the bridegroom), assisted by the Rev. Francis SAUNDERSON, Captain Henry Marcus BERESFORD, 9th Regiment, to Julia Ellen, daughter of the Rev. Francis R. MAUNSELL, rector of Castleisland, County Kerry.


On the 6th instant, at Atramont, in the county of Wexford, Susan, widow of the late Right Hon. E. PENNEFATHER, formerly Lord Chief Justice of Ireland, aged 75 years.

On the 7th instant, at Carrickaderry House, Clonibret, county Monaghan, after a painful and protracted illness, which she bore with Christian resignation, Eliza, the beloved wife of Humphreys JONES, Esq., J.P., and only daughter of Andrew SWANZY, Esq.

On Wednesday evening, in this town, at an advanced age, Mr. P. REILLY, mother of Jas. O'REILLY, Esq., Proprietor of the Meath People.


Henry SMITH, Esq., Sub-Inspector, at Tullamore, has been transferred, at his own request to Mountrath, Queen's County.

Charles Maxwell KERIN, Esq., Sub-Inspector at Midleton, County Cork, has been transferred to Tullamore, vacant by the transfer of Sub-Inspector SMITH.

M. CLANE, Esq., Sub-Inspector, has been transferred from the district of Shinroue, King's County, to that of Midleton, county Cork.

Cadet John J. RALEIGH, depot, Phoenix Park, has, on the recommendation of the Inspector-General been appointed a Sub-Inspector, from the 4th inst.

April 20, 1861


Magistrates present:--William Barrington, Esq., Chairman; William HUMPHRYS, Esq., D.L.; Capt. CARDEN, and William SMITH, Esq.


The parties concerned in the nuisance cases postponed a fortnight ago for the report of Mr. HOPEWELL, Assistant County Surveyor, having been called.

The Chairman read Mr. HOPEWELL's report (the suggestions in which for the abatement of the nuisance complained of by Mr. Edward FEGAN were, similar to those previously made by the Town Sergeant), and said that in this opinion Mr. Hopewell had suggested the only effective mode of abating the nuisance. Mr. FEGAN, the principal sufferer by the nuisance, had shown great patience in not pressing for the infliction of the full penalty, but allowing the case to be postponed day after day, in the hope that the nuisance would be abated. The matter had been finally been left to the decision of Mr. Hopewell, who, by his position, was competent to give an opinion; and he had (illegible) at a small expense, a proper sewer for the carrying off of the flow of water and nuisance could be constructed. If the parties concerned did not make the sewer, and the cases were again brought before him, he would impose the full penalty under the Towns' Improvement Act. He would suggest that the parties should advertise for tenders for the construction of the sewer, paying the expense jointly, according to the valuation of their houses, as suggested by Mr. Hopewell; and it was probable that if they made an application to the County Surveyor, a presentment could be got for a portion of the work.

TUBMAN and TILSON, landlords of some of the houses on the Barrack-hill, from which the nuisance flows, made objections to the decision; but the Chairman having clearly explained to them the provision of the Towns' Improvement Act bearing on their case, all the summonses were "nilled" to give the parties an opportunity of complying with Mr. Hopewell's suggestion.


James BRADY, of Castleterra, summoned Thomas MURRAY, for having allowed three cows and two calves to trespass on his enclosed meadow, and was about to prove his case when MURRAY objected, and said that he did not "kiss the Book" when the oath was administered to him. BRADY accordingly repeated the operation, and then detailed how he discovered in his meadow the wandering quadrupeds of his neighbour. MURRAY did not deny the trespass; but he alleged that the part of BRADY's land on which the cattle trespassed was not a "meadow," as BRADY had too flatteringly styled it, but "a bit of an ould garden, with an ould house on it; part of it a bare rock: it was, for all the world, like an island in a lough--in the middle of my (MURRAY's) land;" that arbitrators had been appointed to draw up a treaty relative to this "island" but the negociations were broken off by BRADY; and that BRADY's fences were very bad--statements which BRADY emphatically denied.

The Chairman said it was the rule of the Court, when summonses for trespass were brought before them, not to enter into the question of fences at all, because, were they to act otherwise, their whole time would be occupied in listening to contradictory swearing then trying to decide from it. Any person aggrieved by bad fences could serve a notice upon the owner to repair them, and if he refused to do so, summon him, and the Court would issue an order for the repairing of the fences.


Sub-Constable LYNCH summoned James HICKS for having allowed his cow to wander and graze on the public road. HICKS, who is an old offender, was fined 6d. and costs, and informed that on the next occasion any of his live stock are caught in the same position, he will have to pay a heavier fine.


Sub-Constable LYNCH summoned Patrick DOWD for having been drunk in the temperate town of Ballyhaise on the 22nd of March. Pat said that he had been evicted from his farm, and was about to emigrate to the dis (sic) United States of America on the day named in the summons he took a little drop, in order to drown grief; and between the whiskey and grief, he became a little "toxicated." He was fined 2s. 6d.


Edward LOUGHERTON, Patrick RORKE, Hugh MONAGHAN, Patrick REILLY, and John FOY were charged with having at Ballyhaise, on the night of Thursday, the 11th instant, attempted to rescue a prisoner then in custody of the police, and with having assaulted the police in the discharge of their duty--the later charge being principally against MONAGHAN and LOUGHERTON..

An application was made on the part of the defendants to have the case postponed, as Mr. John Armstrong, whom they had engaged to appear from them, was unable to attend. The Court refused the application, and the case was then gone into.

It appeared from the evidence of the Constabulary that on the above night sub-constable CONNELL and another sub-constable, while on duty, heard a drunken man shouting near the end of the town, and immediately ran towards the place from whence the shouting proceeded. On arriving at the place they found the defendants endeavouring to bring a drunken man home. They arrested the latter, but the defendants were not willing to let him go with the police, and dragged him from them--bringing him a distance of about thirty perches. The police tried to recover possession of their prisoner, when LOUGHERTON assaulted Sub-constable CONNELL, tearing his coat stock, and the buttons of his tunic, and kicking him several times.--MONAGHAN and RORKE also caught him by the neck, but did not strike him. A civilian who witnessed the assaults and attempted rescue ran towards the police station, and informed the other police of what was going on, which Sub-constable M'PARTLAND and others came, and assisted in recapturing the prisoner and arresting defendants. There were several persons on the road, but none of them assisted the police.....They did not know who the drunken man was when they first arrested him; but they knew FOY and MONAGHAN. They afterwards discovered that the drunken man was a person named REILLY (brother to one of the defendants) who was convicted and punished for the manslaughter of a man named SMITH some time since, and they knew that the district towards which the party were going--Dresternan--was one of the worst in the county.... The case having closed, the Court waived the charge of rescue, and for the assault on the police sentenced Hugh MONAGHAN and Edward LOUGHERTON to one-month's imprisonment each, with hard labour; and FOY, RORKE, and REILLY to pay a fine of 10s., or in default, to be imprisoned for a fortnight each, with hard labour.


Jared GREGG had a civil bill process against George PHAIR for 1l., balance of 3l., amount of settled account, which defendant promised to pay, and for which he gave plaintiff an I.O.U.

Plaintiff's son appeared, and handed the I.O.U. to the Court.

Defendant stated that he went to plaintiff for a 'character,' which plaintiff said he would give him, and told him to bring a pen and ink; he did so, and then plaintiff wrote the I.O.U. and asked him to sign it; he did so, without knowing the contents; the amount of the I.O.U. was for the balance of con-acre potato ground, which he took from plaintiff at £8 an acre, but according to that rate, the sum would not be due to plaintiff.

Plaintiff's son (who witnessed the I.O.U.) could not swear that it was read to defendant before he put his "mark"on it, and could give no information as to the debt.

Mr. SMITH told him that when he next witnessed an I.O.U. he should see that it was read to the party giving it. If this had been done in the present case, the defendant would have been liable. As it was, the I.O.U. was not valid.

Chairman--Certainly not.

The case was dismissed without prejudice.


William CARROLL was brought up charged on the informations of Eliza CARROLL, his wife, with having beaten and ill-treated her.

The Chairman told the prisoner that the Court had received a letter from his wife, begging that he might not be punished. As he had been a week in gaol, they did not, under the circumstances, wish to press the case, in the hope that his week's imprisonment would be a warning to him, and that he would not be guilty of the same offence again. They would therefore discharge him, on entering into his own recognizances in the sum of £5 to keep the peace.

The prisoner thanked the Court, and was then discharged.


Eliza TIMMONS was charged with having been drunk in the streets of Cavan on Saturday night, and with having had in her possession a bundle containing wearing apparel, for which she could not satisfactorily account. One of the workmen on the railway claimed and identified the bundle, which he said he forgot when in company with the defendant. He did not accuse her of stealing it, as he heard that she had been inquiring about him, in order to return it to him. The court directed that the bundle should be given to him, and giving the defendant the "benefit of the doubt," ordered her to be discharged.

The Court then rose.

DEATH OF MR. PATRICK GANNON--We regret to announce the death of Mr. Patrick GANNON, brother of Mr. John GANNON, merchant, Cavan. Mr. GANNON had been suffering for a considerable time from illness of the spine, but his death was comparatively unexpected. A few days previous to his death he left Cavan to pay a visit to a relative at Killasbee, in the county of Longford, where he expired on Tuesday morning. His remains were brought to Cavan by train on the following evening--when the High Mass and other customary services of the Roman Catholic Church were celebrated. The funeral procession left Cavan on Thursday....The Right Rev. Dr. BROWN, Right Rev. B BRADY, and a large number of Roman Catholic clergymen accompanied the funeral.....Mr. GANNON was in his 26th year and much esteemed by all classes for his sterling probity and agreeable manners and was a zealous member of the local society for the relief of the poorer classes of his own persuasion. His premature death is greatly deplored by his family and personal friends.

SUPPOSED FATAL ACCIDENT TO A NATIVE OF THE COUNTY OF CAVAN, IN VICTORIA--We have received a letter from Victoria, under date February 7th, containing a request that we would publish the following paragraph from a paper published in that colony, "as it might be the means of conveying intelligence of him to the relatives of the apparently unfortunate individual referred to."... "SUPPOSED FATAL ACCIDENT.--Two or three days since a bundle was found on one of the banks of the Ovens River, a short distance below Mr. AUGER's Lone Star Hotel; and as it was evident it had been there some time, it is naturally believed that the owner must have either fallen into the river when asleep, or had been carried down the stream when attempting to ascertain its depth previous to fording it. The parcel contained two caps, and some other wearing apparel of little value; a Catholic prayer book, and one or two other Roman Catholic publications. Inside the cover of one of those books was written the name of Patrick O'REILLY, and stating that it was his book, bought for his own use;" and that "if it be lost or stolen, the finder will be rewarded by the Almighty and by me.--P. O'R." In another volume again appeared the name--"Patrick O;REILLY, Lacheniere, Co. Cavan, Ireland; and his book, bought in Dublin city in the year of our Lord 1854..."The body of the supposed deceased has not yet been found, and it is possible he may not have met the fate which appearances would suggest. Should he, therefore, still be alive, he will learn from this that his bundle is in the possession of the gentleman above referred to.--Constitution.


WEDNESDAY--Last night, at a late hour, intelligence was received in this town that a man named Edward GORMAN, residing at Dromoyle, who was employed as caretaker over the property there of Dawson H. VAUGHAN, Esq., a minor, under his guardian, Joseph H. HUTCHINSON, Esq., Golden Grove, was found severely beaten on the road, in a state of helpless insensibility, at Colluagrower, within two miles of this town. It is ascertained that he was attending the races at Clonkelly on that day, and that on his return home he was waylaid and thus savagely beaten. The unfortunate man was found by a person named HARRIS laying on the road in a pool of blood, apparently dead...On hearing of the occurrence Sub-Inspector HILL with his usual promptness, proceed to Colluagrower, but GORMAN was unable to speak. Dr. WALLACE was also in attendance, and found several deep wounds on the front and back of GORMAN's head, supposed to have been inflicted with sticks and stones. This day Mr. CURRAN, R.M., and Sub-Inspector HILL, have been engaged in making inquiries, but up to the present no arrests have been made. Report states that four persons at least were engaged in the murder.


3rd Light Dragoons--We are sorry to announce the death of Cornet DALY, of this regiment, which occurred in Dublin. Cornet DALY was in his 22nd year, and became Cornet 3rd Light Dragoons by purchase on September 18, 1860.

April 27, 1861

ELECTION ON DIT.--DROGHEDA.--On Monday morning the Hon. Charles MIDDLETON, who was candidate for our borough in the last election in opposition to James M'CANN, Esq., the sitting member, arrived here by the ten o'clock train. He walked into town from the railway terminus, and, on being recognised , was loudly cheered. He first called on the Very Rev. Thomas MATTHEWS, P.P., and Vicar-General of the Diocese of Meath, with whom he stopped at the parochial residence in James's-street for fully an hour. Mr. MIDDLETON next proceeded to the residence of our enterprising citizen, St. George SMITH, Esq., on the Mall. Mr. Middleton remained there nearly half an hour, and next came to the Imperial Hotel, where he was cordially welcomed by a number of friends, including Major SMITH, of Annesbrook, the High Sheriff of Meath; H. P. CODDINGTON, Esq., J.P., of Old Bridge;....It is believed that the hon. gentleman's visit indicates a not distant election. This opinion is strengthened by the rumour, industriously circulated here, that Mr. James M'CANN intends speedily to resign in favour of his son, Mr. Stanislaus M'CANN. I have no doubt that this is the case, as Mr. M'CANN is not in the best of health...The son alluded to is an out-and-out Radical. On the platform, on Mr. MIDDLETON's return to Dublin, he was again cheered by electors, mechanics, and artisans.--Saunders.

FRIGHTFUL ACCIDENT.--A young man named Darby HAIRE, who was attending a thrashing machine worked by two horses at a place called Ashford, near the village of Cong, in the county Mayo, got his legs cut off by the main wheels whilst crossing the pole to which the horses were yoked....--Galway Express



Before William BABINGTON, Esq., J.P., Chairman; Robert ERSKINE, Esq., J.P.; and Wm. M. Hickson, Esq., R.M.

Robert MORROW, of Keadue, was fined 2s., and costs for the trespass of an ass and foal on the lands of Robert ROONEY.

MORROW had a cross-summons against ROONEY for having injured his fence and pass, but the case was dismissed.

James SMITH was fined in the costs for having been drunk in the streets of this town on the night of the 13th inst.

Mr. Peter M'GAURAN summoned two youngsters named Patrick MAGUIRE and Patrick CLARKE for having trespassed on the meadow for the purpose of enjoying a cock-fight, and he stated that his meadow has been greatly injured by the juvenile sportsmen and others who are continually trespassing on it; but he did not wish to press the case if the defendants promised not to repeat the offence. The promise was given, and the costs paid, by the parents of the defendants.

Susan WOODS was brought up in custody, charged on informations with drunkenness, stone-throwing, and disorderly and riotous conduct in the streets of this town on the 19th inst. She stated in excuse that, hearing her husband had enlisted on the day in question, she drank some whiskey, and did not (know) what she was doing during the remainder of the day. The Court, taking into account that she had been some days in prison, and the other circumstances of the case, allowed her to be discharged on entering into her own recognizances in the sum of £5 to be of peaceable behaviour for the space of 12 months.

Mr. John ARMSTRONG appeared on behalf of the landlords of the houses on Barrack-hill affected by Mr. HOPEWELL's proposal for the abatement of the nuisance complained of by Mr. FEGAN, and stated that his clients were willing to make open sewers from their respective houses, so as to let the water flow freely down the hill, but they thought it unfair that they should be put to the expense of carrying out Mr. HOPEWELL's plan. After considerable discussion, the Chairman said the Court would make no order in the case: it was not compulsory on Mr. ARMSTRONG's clients or the representatives of the late Mr. PATTERSON to carry out Mr. HOPEWELL's plan, but they would do well to adopt that or some other plan for abating the nuisance complained of, and thus avoid future litigation and expense.

The Court then rose.


April 25, in Templeport Church, by the Rev. J. R. BROUGHAM, eldest son of Robert PRINGLE, Esq., Clifton Hill, to Jane, second daughter of the late Robert BROWNLOW, Esq., Lisdarn, near Cavan. (Transcriber's note: No first name listed for "eldest son".)


On 24th April at John Street, Ballina, Mary, wife of Rev. William HAMILTON, aged 68.

(Before Mr. Justice HAYES)

The Queen v. Robert GAMBLE

The prisoner, Robert GAMBLE, is at present confined in the jail at Cavan, charged with being concerned in the murder of a child found dead in the Corroneary meeting-house yard on the 17th of March last. He was committed on a magistrate's warrant on the 14th April.

Mr. Robert JOHNSTON moved, on behalf of the prisoner, for certified copies of the informations against him. The prisoner had made an affidavit declaring his innocence of the crime charged against him, and his readiness to take his trial at the ensuing assizes. He required copies of the information, in order to found an application to be admitted to bill pending the trial.

There being no appearance for the Crown, His Lordship granted the application.

THE MAGISTRACY--John Walsh M'MASTER, Esq., of Dumbarton House, Gilford, has been appointed by the Lord Chancellor to the commission of the peace for the County of Armagh.

MELANCHOLY AND FATAL ACCIDENT--It is with feelings of deepest regret that we have to record a melancholy and fatal accident which took place on our premises on Thursday evening, and resulted in the death of our machinist, Mr. James COOPER. The deceased, at the time of the accident, was in charge of the printing machine, and one of the carrying tapes having gone out of order, he stopped the machine, and descended into the pit to adjust it. Having reached the pit, he directed the machine to be again set in motion, on which he should have stooped down in the pit, to avoid coming in contact with the works; but this, appears, he neglected to do, as he was almost instantaneously killed, the type-table of the machine striking him on the side of the head, and inflicting injuries which caused death. Mr. COOPER was a native of Belfast, where his father and other relatives at present reside, and was a most respectable and intelligent workman, bearing the highest character, and much esteemed by all who knew him...He has left a wife and two children to deplore his sudden death.--Derry Standard.

April 18
(before Jude Berwick)

In re John C. RYAN The bankrupt was a grocer and shopkeeper in Carrickmacross....On the 13th of February last the petition in bankruptcy was filed...Subsequently an execution for £17, at the suit of a creditor name CAROLAN, was placed in the hands of the sub-sheriff of the county Monaghan, who sold and paid the amount to the creditor....On the next day the sheriff sold under other executions, the proceeds of which he held.....

April 19

In re J. MAGUIRE The bankrupt was a general shopkeeper in Fermanagh. A question was submitted to the Court arising out of proceedings taken upon two bonds. On of those was given by the bankrupt to a creditor, Mr. WHITNEY, for £84, on the 9th of May last....The case was adjourned for further evidence.

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.